United States

Node Importance Estimation (NIE) in Knowledge Graphs (KGs) aims to quantify the significance of entities, serving as a pivotal instrument for deciphering the latent mechanisms of social dynamics. However, existing methods are often confined to supervised paradigms and rely heavily on topological aggregation, resulting in limited generalization capability. To address these challenges, we propose GenNIE, the first end-to-end generative reasoning framework for NIE. Specifically, GenNIE leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) integrated with topological information to generate precise importance scores for entities in KGs. Furthermore, GenNIE introduces a Global-Structural Graph Perception mechanism to empower the LLMs with holistic graph cognition. Extensive experiments demonstrate the performance superiority of GenNIE and its robust generalization across diverse domains. Our code is available at https://github.com/CoffeyF/GenNIE.git.

ACL 2026

Beyond Topology: Generative Node Importance Estimation via Structure-Guided Semantic Reasoning

## Welcome!
"I am excited to welcome you to this year’s edition of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing! Importantly, it marks the 30th edition of EMNLP. With over 8,000 submissions, more than 3,000 accepted papers, and thousands of attendees, we have come a long way from that first
workshop, which had 14 accepted papers. As the field looks ahead, Suzhou is the fitting location for celebrating this milestone: rooted in a long literary tradition, yet modern and forward-looking, and home to a large share of the NLP community." 

*Message from the General Chair, Dirk Hovy*

EMNLP 2025

Celebrate 30 Years of EMNLP! 
EMNLP 2025 will be held in Suzhou, China from November 5th to November 9th, 2025.

technical paper

It is my great pleasure and honor to welcome you to the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2026), held in San Diego, California, USA, July 2–7, 2026. ACL 2026 continues our fields tradition of excellence in scholarship, innovation, and inclusivity, and I am deeply grateful to the many volunteers who have worked tirelessly to bring this event to life.

It is exciting to see the many developments in the field reflected at our conference, such as the advancement of large language models (born out of our community) into many application directions. This is not without challenges, partly due to unsolved problems, and partly due to misuse of the technology. All this is reflected well at ACL 2026. The conference also reflects that the field is not only about advancing technology, but also the science of fundamentally understanding language and how it is use by many different speaker communities. 
[Full Message from General Chair Philipp Koehn](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QiJFOmMjvDgsDo3i1XzlQnImxe3RU_Cy/view?usp=sharing) 
<html><button style="display: inline-flex; align-items: center; justify-content: center; white-space: nowrap; border-radius: 9999px; font-weight: bold; background: #7c3aed; color: white; font-family: 'Space Grotesk', sans-serif; height: 40px; font-size: 16px; padding: 0 20px; border: none; cursor: pointer" onclick="window.open('https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QiJFOmMjvDgsDo3i1XzlQnImxe3RU_Cy/view?usp=sharing')">Conference Handbook</button></html>

To access this event page, you need to log in with the **email address you registered with**. Access credentials will be sent to your email from Underline - subject line "Welcome to ACL 2026". Please be sure to check your spam email folder if you do not see an email confirmation right away.

To access this event page, you are required to register.
Please complete your registration to continue.

We recommend reading [**the registration information**](https://2026.aclweb.org/registration/) first.

Registration Required

The 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2026) will take place in San Diego, California, from July 2 - 7, 2026.

Psychological defenses are strategies, often automatic, that people use to manage distress. Rigid use or overuse of defenses is negatively linked to mental health and shapes what speakers disclose and how they accept or resist help. However, defenses are complex and difficult to reliably measure, particularly in clinical dialogues. We introduce PsyDefConv, a dialogue corpus with help seeker utterances labeled for defense level, and DMRS Co-Pilot, a four-stage pipeline that provides evidence-based pre-annotations. The corpus contains 200 dialogues and 4,709 utterances, including 2,336 help seeker turns, with double-blind labeling reaching Cohen’s kappa of 0.639. In a counterbalanced study, the co-pilot reduced average annotation time by 24.0%. In expert review, it averaged 4.62 for evidence supportiveness, 4.44 for clinical plausibility, and 4.40 for insight on a seven-point scale. Benchmarks with strong large language models (LLMs) in zero-shot and fine-tuning settings demonstrate clear headroom, with the best macro F1-score around 30% and a tendency to overpredict mature defenses. Corpus analyses confirm that mature defenses are most common and reveal emotion-specific deviations. We release the corpus, annotations, code, and prompts to support research on defensive functioning in language.

You Never Know a Person, You Only Know Their Defenses: Detecting Levels of Psychological Defense Mechanisms in Supportive Conversations

As large language models (LLMs) are widely deployed as domain-specific agents, many benchmarks have been proposed to evaluate their ability to follow instructions and make decisions in real-world scenarios. However, business scenarios often involve complex standard operating procedures (SOPs), and the evaluation of LLM capabilities in such contexts has not been fully explored. To bridge this gap, we propose SOP-Maze, a benchmark constructed from real-world business data and adapted into a collection of 397 instances and 3422 subtasks from 23 complex SOP scenarios. We further categorize SOP tasks into two broad classes: Lateral Root System (LRS), representing wide-option tasks that demand precise selection; and Heart Root System (HRS), which emphasizes deep logical reasoning with complex branches. Extensive experiments reveal that nearly all state-of-the-art models struggle with SOP-Maze. We conduct a comprehensive analysis and identify three key error categories: (i) route blindness: difficulty following procedures; (ii) conversational fragility: inability to handle real dialogue nuances; and (iii) calculation errors: mistakes in time or arithmetic reasoning under complex contexts. The systematic study explores LLM performance across SOP tasks that challenge both breadth and depth, offering new insights for improving model capabilities. We have open-sourced our work on the anonymous link: https://github.com/meituan-longcat/SOP-Maze.

SOP-Maze: Evaluating Large Language Models on Complicated Business Standard Operating Procedures

The capability to precisely adhere to instructions is a cornerstone for Large Language Models (LLMs) to function as dependable agents in real-world scenarios. However, confronted with complex prompts, LLMs frequently encounter difficulties in fulfilling all specified requirements within a single response. Drawing inspiration from recent advancements in Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting and self-correction methodologies, we introduce Meeseeks, a fully automated iterative instruction-following benchmark equipped with an integrated feedback mechanism. Meeseeks identifies erroneous components in model responses and provides corresponding feedback accurately, thereby iteratively guiding the model toward self-correction. The dataset contains over 700 curated instances annotated by 32 distinct capability tags in Chinese and English. Extensive experimental results reveal that different state-of-the-art commercial and open-source LLMs exhibit vastly disparate performance, and even after 20 turns of iterative feedback-driven self-correction, nearly all models demonstrate suboptimal performance. We conducted comprehensive analysis and uncovered numerous common issues prevalent in current state-of-the-art models, as well as several counterintuitive phenomena. Meeseeks has been open-sourced on https://github.com/ADoublLEN/Meeseeks.

Meeseeks: A Feedback-Driven, Iterative Self-Correction Benchmark evaluating LLMs' Instruction Following Capability

Autonomous agents powered by large language models (LLM-based agents) are capable of using off-the-shelf tools to interact with the environment, solve real-world problems, and boost work efficiency. However, current approaches to enhancing tool use for LLM-based agents primarily focus on post-training fine-tuning or test-time context extension. These methods overlook the fundamental tool knowledge acquisition during the early training phase, where models actually learn and internalize core knowledge representations, restricting model performance on out-of-distribution tool usage. To solve such a problem, we introduce enhancing \textbf{tool} knowledge for LLM-based agents during \textbf{c}ontinuous \textbf{p}re-\textbf{t}raining (\textbf{ToolCPT}). We identify and bridge a key gap in current LLM training by shifting focus from tool-calling patterns to deep internalization of core tool-knowledge representations. We begin by curating 5.1 million code artifacts from large-scale, high-quality code repositories. These artifacts are selected based on a set of criteria that defines a usable "proxy agent tool", thereby forming a comprehensive agent tool library. For each proxy tool, we then create a detailed playbook covering implementation specifications, core functionalities, interaction protocols with other tools, and illustrative positive and negative examples. This process yields a large-scale tool knowledge corpus comprising 18 billion tokens, which is used to continuously pre-train our model. Experiments show our playbook-enhanced corpus catalyzes deep knowledge internalization, driving the model to notable performance gains on multiple standard benchmarks.

ToolCPT: Improving Tool Utilization in LLM Agents via Continuous Pre-training

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) effectively improves the accuracy of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, retrieval noises significantly undermine the quality of LLMs' generation, necessitating the development of denoising mechanisms. Previous works extract evidence straightforwardly without deep thinking, which may risk filtering out key clues and struggle with generalization. To this end, we propose EviOmni, which learns to extract rational evidence via reasoning first and then extracting. Specifically, EviOmni integrates evidence reasoning and evidence extraction into one unified trajectory, followed by knowledge token masking to avoid information leakage, optimized via on-policy reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards in terms of answer, length, and format. Extensive experiments on five benchmark datasets show the superiority of EviOmni, which provides compact and high-quality evidence, enhances the accuracy of downstream tasks, and supports both traditional and agentic RAG systems.

Learning to Extract Rational Evidence via Reinforcement Learning for Retrieval-Augmented Generation

The initial outpatient consultation is critical for clinical decision-making, yet it is often conducted by a single physician under time pressure, making it prone to cognitive biases and incomplete evidence capture. Although the Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) reduces these risks, they are costly and difficult to scale to real-time intake. We propose Aegle, a synchronous virtual MDT framework that brings MDT-level reasoning to outpatient consultations via a graph-based multi-agent architecture. Aegle formalizes the consultation state using a structured SOAP representation, separating evidence collection from diagnostic reasoning to improve traceability and bias control. An orchestrator dynamically activates specialist agents, which perform decoupled parallel reasoning and are subsequently integrated by an aggregator into a coherent clinical note. Experiments on ClinicalBench and a real-world RAPID-IPN dataset across 24 departments and 53 metrics show that Aegle consistently outperforms state-of-the-art proprietary and open-source models in documentation quality and consultation capability.

Beyond the Individual: Virtualizing Multi-Disciplinary Reasoning for Clinical Intake via Collaborative Agents

Speculative decoding (SD) accelerates large language model inference by allowing a lightweight draft model to propose outputs that a stronger target model verifies. However, its token-centric nature allows erroneous steps to propagate. Prior approaches mitigate this using external reward models, but incur additional latency, computational overhead, and limit generalizability. We propose SpecGuard, a verification-aware speculative decoding framework that performs step-level verification using only model-internal signals. At each step, SpecGuard samples multiple draft candidates and selects the most consistent step, which is then validated using an ensemble of two lightweight model-internal signals: (i) an attention-based grounding score that measures attribution to the input and previously accepted steps, and (ii) a log-probability-based score that captures token-level confidence. These signals jointly determine whether a step is accepted or recomputed using the target, allocating compute selectively. Experiments across a range of reasoning benchmarks show that SpecGuard improves accuracy by 3.6% while reducing latency by ~11%, outperforming both SD and reward-guided SD.

From Tokens to Steps: Verification-Aware Speculative Decoding for Efficient Multi-Step Reasoning

The rise of Human-AI collaboration can effectively speed up the research process for experts and allow anyone with critical thinking skills to conduct innovative work. A key part of this collaboration is the AI's ability to improve a paper with human feedback—updating both the text and experiments to meet high standards. To evaluate this skill, we introduce ReviseBench, an extensible benchmark built on real academic data that can be easily scaled via agent-driven automated data collection. It tests the skills of Large Language Models (LLMs) on paper interpretation, experimental implementation, and paper formulation, using authors' camera-ready versions as natural human baselines. To facilitate a fine-grained assessment, we further propose ReviseArena, a platform supporting pair-wise comparisons between different AI-revised papers. Our initial evaluation results on ReviseBench reveal that even state-of-the-art foundation LLMs struggle significantly in this domain, achieving a win rate of less than 10\% against human experts, and facing issues like incremental revision, unprofessional revision, and potential data fabrication. Our code and data are released publicly at: https://github.com/CGCL-codes/ReviseBench.

Can AI Revise Research Papers with Human Review Feedback? An Empirical Study and Benchmark

Exploratory GUI testing is essential for software quality but suffers from high manual costs. While Multi-modal Large Language Model (MLLM) agents excel in navigation, they fail to autonomously discover defects due to two core challenges: Goal-Oriented Masking, where agents prioritize task completion over reporting anomalies, and Execution-Bias Attribution, where system defects are misidentified as agent errors. To address these, we first introduce GUITestBench, the first interactive benchmark for this task, featuring 143 tasks across 26 defects. We then propose GUITester, a multi-agent framework that decouples navigation from verification via two modules: (i) a Planning-Execution Module (PEM) that proactively probes for defects via embedded testing intents, and (ii) a Hierarchical Reflection Module (HRM) that resolves attribution ambiguity through interaction history analysis. GUITester achieves an F1-score of 48.90% (Pass@3) on GUITestBench, outperforming state-of-the-art baselines (33.35%). Our work demonstrates the feasibility of autonomous exploratory testing and provides a robust foundation for future GUI quality assurance.

GUITester: Enabling GUI Agents for Exploratory Defect Discovery

Failures are inevitable when embodied agents execute complex tasks. Visual-language models (VLMs) serve as the core component of embodied agents in perceiving the environment and making decisions. Assessing the capabilities of VLMs in detecting and reasoning about failures has become increasingly important. Previous work primarily considered low-level manipulation failures (e.g., 3cm grasp offsets), neglecting high-level failures arising during long-horizon task execution (e.g., object-dropping failure in the ``clean room'' task) by embodied agents. In this paper, we propose FAER, a failure-aware benchmark aiming to evaluate the performance of VLMs in terms of failure detection, failure categorization, failure description, and failure correction in long-horizon tasks. FAER comprises 3,323 episodes, spanning 3 scenes, 65 tasks, and 83 objects. We assess the performance of 16 widely utilized VLMs and 4 LLMs for FAER tasks. Experimental results show that nearly all VLMs, even GPT-4o, exhibit limited performance in failure detection with a high false negative rate, meaning that they tend to ignore abnormal events, revealing notable gaps in current models' capacity to effectively handle failures.

Downloads

Next from ACL 2026

You Never Know a Person, You Only Know Their Defenses: Detecting Levels of Psychological Defense Mechanisms in Supportive Conversations

Similar lecture

Enrich-on-Graph: Query-Graph Alignment for Complex Reasoning with LLM Enriching