United States

We present ACCORD, a framework and benchmark suite for disentangling the commonsense grounding and reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs) through controlled, multi-hop counterfactuals. ACCORD introduces formal elements to commonsense reasoning to explicitly control and quantify reasoning complexity beyond the typical 1 or 2 hops. Uniquely, ACCORD can automatically generate benchmarks of arbitrary reasoning complexity, so it scales with future LLM improvements. Indeed, our experiments on state-of-the-art LLMs show performance degrading to below random chance with only moderate scaling, leaving substantial headroom for improvement. We release a leaderboard of the benchmark suite tested in this work, as well as code for automatically generating more complex benchmarks.

NAACL 2025

ACCORD: Closing the Commonsense Measurability Gap

nlp datasets

automatic evaluation of datasets

automatic creation and evaluation of language resources

evaluation methodologies

corpus creation

benchmarking

evaluation

### Welcome to 2025 Annual Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Welcome to the 2025 meeting of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics! I am proud to help organize the first NAACL conference to carry the new name of our organization, one that emphasizes inclusion for all of the Americas. I am also pleased to welcome you to Albuquerque, New Mexico, a state whose unique blend of cultural influences will make for an excellent backdrop for NAACL 2025, especially with this year’s special theme on NLP in a Multicultural World. 
**[Continue reading...](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jX-qGhqVSZZCIrAnJaz798pflu5Irrdn/view?usp=sharing)**

*- Colin Cherry, Google, NAACL 2025 General Chair* 

[![](https://assets.underline.io/markdown_image/1/image/b087f8a4dc5816d6e1a6514e59c59ac3.png)](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T96GzPqObXrMln2BMByCSXTSizjTg69P/view?usp=sharing)

You need to log in with the email address you registered with. Access credentials have been sent to your email. 

Please be sure to check your spam and other email folders if you do not see an email confirmation right away.

Please log in to explore this event.

To access NAACL 2025 event page you are required to register. Please follow [**this link**](https://2025.naacl.org/registration/registration/) to register. Access will depend on your registration type.

Please register!

Welcome to 2025 Annual Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

poster

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant performance improvements across various cognitive tasks. An emerging application is using LLMs to enhance retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) capabilities. These systems require LLMs to understand user queries, retrieve relevant information, and synthesize coherent and accurate responses. Given the increasing real-world deployment of such systems, comprehensive evaluation becomes crucial. To this end, we propose FRAMES (Factuality, Retrieval, And reasoning MEasurement Set), a high-quality evaluation dataset designed to test LLMs' ability to provide factual responses, assess retrieval capabilities, and evaluate the reasoning required to generate final answers. While previous work has provided datasets and benchmarks to evaluate these abilities in isolation, FRAMES offers a unified framework that provides a clearer picture of LLM performance in end-to-end RAG scenarios. Our dataset comprises challenging multi-hop questions that require the integration of information from multiple sources. We present baseline results demonstrating that even state-of-the-art LLMs struggle with this task, achieving 0.40 accuracy with no retrieval. The accuracy is significantly improved with our proposed multi-step retrieval pipeline, achieving an accuracy of 0.66 (>50% improvement). We hope our work will help bridge evaluation gaps and assist in developing more robust and capable RAG systems.

Fact, Fetch, and Reason: A Unified Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Summarization is one of the most common tasks performed by large language models (LLMs), especially in applications like Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG). However, existing evaluations of hallucinations in LLM-generated summaries, and evaluations of hallucination detection models both suffer from a lack of diversity and recency in the LLM and LLM families considered. This paper introduces FaithBench, a summarization hallucination benchmark comprising challenging hallucinations made by 10 modern LLMs from 8 different families, with ground truth annotations by human experts. ``Challenging'' here means summaries on which popular, state-of-the-art hallucination detection models, including GPT-4o-as-a-judge, disagreed on. Our results show GPT-4o and GPT-3.5-Turbo produce the least hallucinations. However, most state-of-the-art hallucination detection models have near 50% accuracies on FaithBench, indicating lots of room for future improvement.

FaithBench: A Diverse Hallucination Benchmark for Summarization by Modern LLMs

K-nearest neighbor language models (kNN-LMs), which integrate retrieval with next-word prediction, have demonstrated strong performance in language modeling as well as some downstream NLP benchmarks. These results have led researchers to argue that models trained on poor quality or outdated data could perform well by employing a kNN extension that has access to a higher-quality datastore. In this work, we ask whether this improved ability to recall information really translates into downstream abilities. We extensively evaluate kNN-LMs on a diverse set of tasks, ranging from sentiment classification and commonsense reasoning to multi-hop reasoning. Results show that kNN-LMs excel at memory-intensive tasks, where utilizing the patterns in the input is sufficient for determining the output, but struggle with reasoning tasks that require integrating multiple pieces of information to derive new knowledge. We further demonstrate through oracle experiments and qualitative analysis that even with perfect retrieval, kNN-LMs still fail to determine the correct answers, placing an upper bound on their reasoning performance.

Great Memory, Shallow Reasoning: Limits of kNN-LMs

Language model systems are used to process diverse categories of input requests, ranging from improving creative writing to solving programming challenges. It would be useful to know which categories they are good at. However, existing evaluations compare model performance on pre-defined categories, failing to reflect a system's performance on finer-grained or novel ones. We propose to automatically search for finer-grained categories based on inputs where a system performs well or poorly, and describe them in natural language. To search for these categories, we propose a large number of candidate category descriptions, e.g. ``Communication Improvement'', find the subset of inputs that match the category descriptions, and calculate the performance on these categories; then we sort these categories based on their performance, thereby highlighting those that score high or low. As one application, we apply our method to compare LLaMA 3-70B and Claude 3 Opus, which have similar Elo-ratings on Chatbot Arena; our method finds the former is weaker at making text more professional and humorous while better at providing psychological insights, depicting a more nuanced picture of model performance.

Language Models can Categorize System Inputs for Performance Analysis

Syllogistic reasoning is crucial for Natural Language Inference (NLI). This capability is particularly significant in specialized domains such as biomedicine, where it can support automatic evidence interpretation and scientific discovery. This paper presents SylloBio-NLI, a novel framework that leverages external ontologies to systematically instantiate diverse syllogistic arguments for biomedical NLI. We employ SylloBio-NLI to evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) on identifying valid conclusions and extracting supporting evidence across 28 syllogistic schemes instantiated with human genome pathways. Extensive experiments reveal that biomedical syllogistic reasoning is particularly challenging for zero-shot LLMs, which achieve an average accuracy between 70% on generalized modus ponens and 23% on disjunctive syllogism. At the same time, we found that few-shot prompting can boost the performance of different LLMs, including Gemma (+14%) and LLama-3 (+43%). However, a deeper analysis shows that both techniques exhibit high sensitivity to superficial lexical variations, highlighting a dependency between reliability, models' architecture, and pre-training regime. Overall, our results indicate that, while in-context examples have the potential to elicit syllogistic reasoning in LLMs, existing models are still far from achieving the robustness and consistency required for safe biomedical NLI applications.

SylloBio-NLI: Evaluating Large Language Models on Biomedical Syllogistic Reasoning

As the fluency of ad texts automatically generated by natural language generation technologies continues to improve, there is an increasing demand to assess the quality of these creatives in real-world setting. We propose **AdTEC**, the first public benchmark to evaluate ad texts from multiple perspectives within practical advertising operations. Our contributions are as follows: (i) Defining five tasks for evaluating the quality of ad texts, as well as constructing a Japanese dataset based on the practical operational experiences of advertising agencies, which are typically maintained in-house. (ii) Validating the performance of existing pre-trained language models (PLMs) and human evaluators on this dataset. (iii) Analyzing the characteristics and providing challenges of the benchmark. Our results show that while PLMs have a practical level of performance in several tasks, humans continue to outperform them in certain domains, indicating that there remains significant potential for further improvement in this area.

AdTEC: A Unified Benchmark for Evaluating Text Quality in Search Engine Advertising

Building pluralistic AI requires designing models that are able to be shaped to represent a wide range of value systems and cultures. Achieving this requires first being able to evaluate the degree to which a given model is capable of reflecting various personas. To this end, we propose a benchmark for evaluating the steerability of model personas as a function of prompting. Our design is based on a formal definition of prompt steerability, which analyzes the degree to which a model's joint behavioral distribution can be shifted from its baseline. By defining steerability indices and inspecting how these indices change as a function of steering effort, we can estimate the steerability of a model across various persona dimensions and directions. Our benchmark reveals that the steerability of many current models is limited --- due to both a skew in their baseline behavior and an asymmetry in their steerability across many persona dimensions. We release an implementation of our benchmark at https://github.com/IBM/prompt-steering.

Evaluating the Prompt Steerability of Large Language Models

Evaluating the quality of machine-generated natural language content is a challenging task in Natural Language Processing (NLP). Recently, large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4 have been employed for this purpose, but they are computationally expensive due to the extensive token usage required by complex evaluation prompts. In this paper, we propose a prompt optimization approach that uses a smaller, fine-tuned language model to compress input data for evaluation prompt, thus reducing token usage and computational cost when using larger LLMs for downstream evaluation. Our method involves a two-stage fine-tuning process: supervised fine-tuning followed by preference optimization to refine the model's outputs based on human preferences. We focus on Machine Translation (MT) evaluation and utilize the GEMBA-MQM metric as a starting point. Our results show a 2.37× reduction in token usage without any loss in evaluation quality. This work makes state-of-the-art LLM-based metrics like GEMBA-MQM more cost-effective and efficient, enhancing their accessibility for broader use.

PromptOptMe: Error-Aware Prompt Compression for LLM-based MT Evaluation Metrics

Aspect-based sentiment analysis (ABSA) is a challenging task of extracting sentiments along with their corresponding aspects and opinion terms from the text. The inherent subjectivity of span annotation makes variability in the surface forms of extracted terms, complicating the evaluation process. Traditional evaluation methods often constrain ground truths (GT) to a single term, potentially misrepresenting the accuracy of semantically valid predictions that differ in surface form. To address this limitation, we propose a novel and fully automated pipeline that expands existing evaluation sets by adding alternative valid terms for aspect and opinion. Our approach facilitates an equitable assessment of language models by accommodating multiple-answer candidates, resulting in enhanced human agreement compared to single-answer test sets (achieving up to a 10%p improvement in Kendall's Tau score). Experimental results demonstrate that our expanded evaluation set helps uncover the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in ABSA tasks, which is concealed by the single-answer GT sets. Consequently, our work contributes to the development of a flexible evaluation framework for ABSA by embracing diverse surface forms to span extraction tasks in a cost-effective and reproducible manner. Our code and dataset is open at https://github.com/dudrrm/zoom-in-n-out-absa.

Single Ground Truth Is Not Enough: Adding Flexibility to Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis Evaluation

Humans have the ability to reason about geometric patterns in images and scenes from a young age. However, developing large multimodal models (LMMs) capable of similar reasoning remains a challenge, highlighting the need for robust evaluation methods to assess these capabilities. We introduce TurtleBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate LMMs' capacity to interpret geometric patterns---given visual examples, textual instructions, or both---and generate precise code outputs. Inspired by turtle geometry, a notion used to teach children foundational coding and geometric concepts, TurtleBench features tasks with patterned shapes that have underlying algorithmic logic. Our evaluation reveals that leading LMMs struggle significantly with these tasks, with GPT-4V achieving only 19% accuracy on the simplest tasks and few-shot prompting only marginally improves their performance (<2%). TurtleBench highlights the gap between human and AI performance in intuitive and visual geometrical understanding, setting the stage for future research in this area and stands as one of the few benchmarks to evaluate the integration of visual understanding and code generation capabilities in LMMs, setting the stage for future research.

Downloads

Next from NAACL 2025

Fact, Fetch, and Reason: A Unified Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Similar lecture

Towards Quantifying Commonsense Reasoning with Mechanistic Insights