pwc-archive/papers-with-abstracts huggingface dataset:
Empaths at SemEval-2025 Task 11: Retrieval-Augmented Approach to Perceived Emotions Prediction
Authors: Lev Morozov, Aleksandr Mogilevskii, Alexander Shirnin
Date: 2025-06-04 00:00:00

This paper describes EmoRAG, a system designed to detect perceived emotions in text for SemEval-2025 Task 11, Subtask A: Multi-label Emotion Detection. We focus on predicting the perceived emotions of the speaker from a given text snippet, labeling it with emotions such as joy, sadness, fear, anger, surprise, and disgust. Our approach does not require additional model training and only uses an ensemble of models to predict emotions. EmoRAG achieves results comparable to the best performing systems, while being more efficient, scalable, and easier to implement.
Zero-Shot Open-Schema Entity Structure Discovery
Authors: Xueqiang Xu, Jinfeng Xiao, James Barry, Mohab Elkaref, Jiaru Zou, Pengcheng Jiang, Yunyi Zhang, Max Giammona, Geeth de Mel, Jiawei Han
Date: 2025-06-04 00:00:00
Tasks: Attribute, graph construction

Entity structure extraction, which aims to extract entities and their associated attribute-value structures from text, is an essential task for text understanding and knowledge graph construction. Existing methods based on large language models (LLMs) typically rely heavily on predefined entity attribute schemas or annotated datasets, often leading to incomplete extraction results. To address these challenges, we introduce Zero-Shot Open-schema Entity Structure Discovery (ZOES), a novel approach to entity structure extraction that does not require any schema or annotated samples. ZOES operates via a principled mechanism of enrichment, refinement, and unification, based on the insight that an entity and its associated structure are mutually reinforcing. Experiments demonstrate that ZOES consistently enhances LLMs' ability to extract more complete entity structures across three different domains, showcasing both the effectiveness and generalizability of the method. These findings suggest that such an enrichment, refinement, and unification mechanism may serve as a principled approach to improving the quality of LLM-based entity structure discovery in various scenarios.
Aligning Large Language Models with Implicit Preferences from User-Generated Content
Authors: Zhaoxuan Tan, Zheng Li, Tianyi Liu, Haodong Wang, Hyokun Yun, Ming Zeng, Pei Chen, Zhihan Zhang, Yifan Gao, Ruijie Wang, Priyanka Nigam, Bing Yin, Meng Jiang
Date: 2025-06-04 00:00:00

Learning from preference feedback is essential for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values and improving the quality of generated responses. However, existing preference learning methods rely heavily on curated data from humans or advanced LLMs, which is costly and difficult to scale. In this work, we present PUGC, a novel framework that leverages implicit human Preferences in unlabeled User-Generated Content (UGC) to generate preference data. Although UGC is not explicitly created to guide LLMs in generating human-preferred responses, it often reflects valuable insights and implicit preferences from its creators that has the potential to address readers' questions. PUGC transforms UGC into user queries and generates responses from the policy model. The UGC is then leveraged as a reference text for response scoring, aligning the model with these implicit preferences. This approach improves the quality of preference data while enabling scalable, domain-specific alignment. Experimental results on Alpaca Eval 2 show that models trained with DPO and PUGC achieve a 9.37% performance improvement over traditional methods, setting a 35.93% state-of-the-art length-controlled win rate using Mistral-7B-Instruct. Further studies highlight gains in reward quality, domain-specific alignment effectiveness, robustness against UGC quality, and theory of mind capabilities. Our code and dataset are available at https://zhaoxuan.info/PUGC.github.io/
SQLens: An End-to-End Framework for Error Detection and Correction in Text-to-SQL
Authors: Yue Gong, Chuan Lei, Xiao Qin, Kapil Vaidya, Balakrishnan Narayanaswamy, Tim Kraska
Date: 2025-06-04 00:00:00
Tasks: Text to SQL, Text-To-SQL, valid

Text-to-SQL systems translate natural language (NL) questions into SQL queries, enabling non-technical users to interact with structured data. While large language models (LLMs) have shown promising results on the text-to-SQL task, they often produce semantically incorrect yet syntactically valid queries, with limited insight into their reliability. We propose SQLens, an end-to-end framework for fine-grained detection and correction of semantic errors in LLM-generated SQL. SQLens integrates error signals from both the underlying database and the LLM to identify potential semantic errors within SQL clauses. It further leverages these signals to guide query correction. Empirical results on two public benchmarks show that SQLens outperforms the best LLM-based self-evaluation method by 25.78% in F1 for error detection, and improves execution accuracy of out-of-the-box text-to-SQL systems by up to 20%.
DRE: An Effective Dual-Refined Method for Integrating Small and Large Language Models in Open-Domain Dialogue Evaluation
Authors: Kun Zhao, Bohao Yang, Chen Tang, Siyuan Dai, Haoteng Tang, Chenghua Lin, Liang Zhan
Date: 2025-06-04 00:00:00
Tasks: Dialogue Evaluation, valid

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at many tasks but struggle with ambiguous scenarios where multiple valid responses exist, often yielding unreliable results. Conversely, Small Language Models (SLMs) demonstrate robustness in such scenarios but are susceptible to misleading or adversarial inputs. We observed that LLMs handle negative examples effectively, while SLMs excel with positive examples. To leverage their complementary strengths, we introduce SLIDE (Small and Large Integrated for Dialogue Evaluation), a method integrating SLMs and LLMs via adaptive weighting. Building on SLIDE, we further propose a Dual-Refinement Evaluation (DRE) method to enhance SLM-LLM integration: (1) SLM-generated insights guide the LLM to produce initial evaluations; (2) SLM-derived adjustments refine the LLM's scores for improved accuracy. Experiments demonstrate that DRE outperforms existing methods, showing stronger alignment with human judgment across diverse benchmarks. This work illustrates how combining small and large models can yield more reliable evaluation tools, particularly for open-ended tasks such as dialogue evaluation.
Please Translate Again: Two Simple Experiments on Whether Human-Like Reasoning Helps Translation
Authors: Di wu, Seth Aycock, Christof Monz
Date: 2025-06-05 00:00:00
Tasks: Translation

Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate strong reasoning capabilities for many tasks, often by explicitly decomposing the task via Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning. Recent work on LLM-based translation designs hand-crafted prompts to decompose translation, or trains models to incorporate intermediate steps.~\textit{Translating Step-by-step}~\citep{briakou2024translating}, for instance, introduces a multi-step prompt with decomposition and refinement of translation with LLMs, which achieved state-of-the-art results on WMT24. In this work, we scrutinise this strategy's effectiveness. Empirically, we find no clear evidence that performance gains stem from explicitly decomposing the translation process, at least for the models on test; and we show that simply prompting LLMs to ``translate again'' yields even better results than human-like step-by-step prompting. Our analysis does not rule out the role of reasoning, but instead invites future work exploring the factors for CoT's effectiveness in the context of translation.
Is It JUST Semantics? A Case Study of Discourse Particle Understanding in LLMs
Authors: William Sheffield, Kanishka Misra, Valentina Pyatkin, Ashwini Deo, Kyle Mahowald, Junyi Jessy Li
Date: 2025-06-05 00:00:00

Discourse particles are crucial elements that subtly shape the meaning of text. These words, often polyfunctional, give rise to nuanced and often quite disparate semantic/discourse effects, as exemplified by the diverse uses of the particle "just" (e.g., exclusive, temporal, emphatic). This work investigates the capacity of LLMs to distinguish the fine-grained senses of English "just", a well-studied example in formal semantics, using data meticulously created and labeled by expert linguists. Our findings reveal that while LLMs exhibit some ability to differentiate between broader categories, they struggle to fully capture more subtle nuances, highlighting a gap in their understanding of discourse particles.
BSBench: will your LLM find the largest prime number?
Authors: K. O. T. Erziev
Date: 2025-06-05 00:00:00
Tasks: Benchmarking

We propose that benchmarking LLMs on questions which have no reasonable answer actually isn't as silly as it sounds. We also present a benchmark that allows such testing and a method to modify the existing datasets, and discover that existing models demonstrate a performance far from the perfect on such questions. Our code and data artifacts are available at https://github.com/L3G5/impossible-bench
SSA-COMET: Do LLMs Outperform Learned Metrics in Evaluating MT for Under-Resourced African Languages?
Authors: Senyu Li, Jiayi Wang, Felermino D. M. A. Ali, Colin Cherry, Daniel Deutsch, Eleftheria Briakou, Rui Sousa-Silva, Henrique Lopes Cardoso, Pontus Stenetorp, David Ifeoluwa Adelani
Date: 2025-06-05 00:00:00
Tasks: Machine Translation, Sentence

Evaluating machine translation (MT) quality for under-resourced African languages remains a significant challenge, as existing metrics often suffer from limited language coverage and poor performance in low-resource settings. While recent efforts, such as AfriCOMET, have addressed some of the issues, they are still constrained by small evaluation sets, a lack of publicly available training data tailored to African languages, and inconsistent performance in extremely low-resource scenarios. In this work, we introduce SSA-MTE, a large-scale human-annotated MT evaluation (MTE) dataset covering 13 African language pairs from the News domain, with over 63,000 sentence-level annotations from a diverse set of MT systems. Based on this data, we develop SSA-COMET and SSA-COMET-QE, improved reference-based and reference-free evaluation metrics. We also benchmark prompting-based approaches using state-of-the-art LLMs like GPT-4o and Claude. Our experimental results show that SSA-COMET models significantly outperform AfriCOMET and are competitive with the strongest LLM (Gemini 2.5 Pro) evaluated in our study, particularly on low-resource languages such as Twi, Luo, and Yoruba. All resources are released under open licenses to support future research.
Demonstrations of Integrity Attacks in Multi-Agent Systems
Authors: Can Zheng, Yuhan Cao, Xiaoning Dong, Tianxing He
Date: 2025-06-05 00:00:00
Tasks: Code Generation, Natural Language Understanding

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in natural language understanding, code generation, and complex planning. Simultaneously, Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) have garnered attention for their potential to enable cooperation among distributed agents. However, from a multi-party perspective, MAS could be vulnerable to malicious agents that exploit the system to serve self-interests without disrupting its core functionality. This work explores integrity attacks where malicious agents employ subtle prompt manipulation to bias MAS operations and gain various benefits. Four types of attacks are examined: \textit{Scapegoater}, who misleads the system monitor to underestimate other agents' contributions; \textit{Boaster}, who misleads the system monitor to overestimate their own performance; \textit{Self-Dealer}, who manipulates other agents to adopt certain tools; and \textit{Free-Rider}, who hands off its own task to others. We demonstrate that strategically crafted prompts can introduce systematic biases in MAS behavior and executable instructions, enabling malicious agents to effectively mislead evaluation systems and manipulate collaborative agents. Furthermore, our attacks can bypass advanced LLM-based monitors, such as GPT-4o-mini and o3-mini, highlighting the limitations of current detection mechanisms. Our findings underscore the critical need for MAS architectures with robust security protocols and content validation mechanisms, alongside monitoring systems capable of comprehensive risk scenario assessment.
Reasoning or Overthinking: Evaluating Large Language Models on Financial Sentiment Analysis
Authors: Dimitris Vamvourellis, Dhagash Mehta
Date: 2025-06-05 00:00:00
Tasks: Sentiment Analysis, Sentiment Classification

We investigate the effectiveness of large language models (LLMs), including reasoning-based and non-reasoning models, in performing zero-shot financial sentiment analysis. Using the Financial PhraseBank dataset annotated by domain experts, we evaluate how various LLMs and prompting strategies align with human-labeled sentiment in a financial context. We compare three proprietary LLMs (GPT-4o, GPT-4.1, o3-mini) under different prompting paradigms that simulate System 1 (fast and intuitive) or System 2 (slow and deliberate) thinking and benchmark them against two smaller models (FinBERT-Prosus, FinBERT-Tone) fine-tuned on financial sentiment analysis. Our findings suggest that reasoning, either through prompting or inherent model design, does not improve performance on this task. Surprisingly, the most accurate and human-aligned combination of model and method was GPT-4o without any Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting. We further explore how performance is impacted by linguistic complexity and annotation agreement levels, uncovering that reasoning may introduce overthinking, leading to suboptimal predictions. This suggests that for financial sentiment classification, fast, intuitive "System 1"-like thinking aligns more closely with human judgment compared to "System 2"-style slower, deliberative reasoning simulated by reasoning models or CoT prompting. Our results challenge the default assumption that more reasoning always leads to better LLM decisions, particularly in high-stakes financial applications.
Are LLMs Reliable Translators of Logical Reasoning Across Lexically Diversified Contexts?
Authors: Qingchuan Li, Jiatong Li, Zirui Liu, Mingyue Cheng, Yuting Zeng, Qi Liu, Tongxuan Liu
Date: 2025-06-05 00:00:00
Tasks: Formal Logic, In-Context Learning, Logical Reasoning

Neuro-symbolic approaches combining large language models (LLMs) with solvers excels in logical reasoning problems need long reasoning chains. In this paradigm, LLMs serve as translators, converting natural language reasoning problems into formal logic formulas. Then reliable symbolic solvers return correct solutions. Despite their success, we find that LLMs, as translators, struggle to handle lexical diversification, a common linguistic phenomenon, indicating that LLMs as logic translators are unreliable in real-world scenarios. Moreover, existing logical reasoning benchmarks lack lexical diversity, failing to challenge LLMs' ability to translate such text and thus obscuring this issue. In this work, we propose SCALe, a benchmark designed to address this significant gap through **logic-invariant lexical diversification**. By using LLMs to transform original benchmark datasets into lexically diversified but logically equivalent versions, we evaluate LLMs' ability to consistently map diverse expressions to uniform logical symbols on these new datasets. Experiments using SCALe further confirm that current LLMs exhibit deficiencies in this capability. Building directly on the deficiencies identified through our benchmark, we propose a new method, MenTaL, to address this limitation. This method guides LLMs to first construct a table unifying diverse expressions before performing translation. Applying MenTaL through in-context learning and supervised fine-tuning (SFT) significantly improves the performance of LLM translators on lexically diversified text. Our code is now available at https://github.com/wufeiwuwoshihua/LexicalDiver.
Selecting Demonstrations for Many-Shot In-Context Learning via Gradient Matching
Authors: Jianfei Zhang, Bei Li, Jun Bai, Rumei Li, Yanmeng Wang, Chenghua Lin, Wenge Rong
Date: 2025-06-05 00:00:00
Tasks: In-Context Learning

In-Context Learning (ICL) empowers Large Language Models (LLMs) for rapid task adaptation without Fine-Tuning (FT), but its reliance on demonstration selection remains a critical challenge. While many-shot ICL shows promising performance through scaled demonstrations, the selection method for many-shot demonstrations remains limited to random selection in existing work. Since the conventional instance-level retrieval is not suitable for many-shot scenarios, we hypothesize that the data requirements for in-context learning and fine-tuning are analogous. To this end, we introduce a novel gradient matching approach that selects demonstrations by aligning fine-tuning gradients between the entire training set of the target task and the selected examples, so as to approach the learning effect on the entire training set within the selected examples. Through gradient matching on relatively small models, e.g., Qwen2.5-3B or Llama3-8B, our method consistently outperforms random selection on larger LLMs from 4-shot to 128-shot scenarios across 9 diverse datasets. For instance, it surpasses random selection by 4% on Qwen2.5-72B and Llama3-70B, and by around 2% on 5 closed-source LLMs. This work unlocks more reliable and effective many-shot ICL, paving the way for its broader application.
SUCEA: Reasoning-Intensive Retrieval for Adversarial Fact-checking through Claim Decomposition and Editing
Authors: Hongjun Liu, Yilun Zhao, Arman Cohan, Chen Zhao
Date: 2025-06-05 00:00:00
Tasks: Fact Checking, Misinformation, Retrieval

Automatic fact-checking has recently received more attention as a means of combating misinformation. Despite significant advancements, fact-checking systems based on retrieval-augmented language models still struggle to tackle adversarial claims, which are intentionally designed by humans to challenge fact-checking systems. To address these challenges, we propose a training-free method designed to rephrase the original claim, making it easier to locate supporting evidence. Our modular framework, SUCEA, decomposes the task into three steps: 1) Claim Segmentation and Decontextualization that segments adversarial claims into independent sub-claims; 2) Iterative Evidence Retrieval and Claim Editing that iteratively retrieves evidence and edits the subclaim based on the retrieved evidence; 3) Evidence Aggregation and Label Prediction that aggregates all retrieved evidence and predicts the entailment label. Experiments on two challenging fact-checking datasets demonstrate that our framework significantly improves on both retrieval and entailment label accuracy, outperforming four strong claim-decomposition-based baselines.
MuSciClaims: Multimodal Scientific Claim Verification
Authors: Yash Kumar Lal, Manikanta Bandham, Mohammad Saqib Hasan, Apoorva Kashi, Mahnaz Koupaee, Niranjan Balasubramanian
Date: 2025-06-05 00:00:00
Tasks: Articles, Claim Verification, Diagnostic, Multimodal Reasoning

Assessing scientific claims requires identifying, extracting, and reasoning with multimodal data expressed in information-rich figures in scientific literature. Despite the large body of work in scientific QA, figure captioning, and other multimodal reasoning tasks over chart-based data, there are no readily usable multimodal benchmarks that directly test claim verification abilities. To remedy this gap, we introduce a new benchmark MuSciClaims accompanied by diagnostics tasks. We automatically extract supported claims from scientific articles, which we manually perturb to produce contradicted claims. The perturbations are designed to test for a specific set of claim verification capabilities. We also introduce a suite of diagnostic tasks that help understand model failures. Our results show most vision-language models are poor (~0.3-0.5 F1), with even the best model only achieving 0.77 F1. They are also biased towards judging claims as supported, likely misunderstanding nuanced perturbations within the claims. Our diagnostics show models are bad at localizing correct evidence within figures, struggle with aggregating information across modalities, and often fail to understand basic components of the figure.
Safe: Enhancing Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models via Retrospective Step-aware Formal Verification
Authors: Chengwu Liu, Ye Yuan, Yichun Yin, Yan Xu, Xin Xu, Zaoyu Chen, Yasheng Wang, Lifeng Shang, Qun Liu, Ming Zhang
Date: 2025-06-05 00:00:00
Tasks: Automated Theorem Proving, Hallucination, Mathematical Reasoning

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has become the de facto method to elicit reasoning capabilities from large language models (LLMs). However, to mitigate hallucinations in CoT that are notoriously difficult to detect, current methods such as process reward models (PRMs) or self-consistency operate as opaque boxes and do not provide checkable evidence for their judgments, possibly limiting their effectiveness. To address this issue, we draw inspiration from the idea that "the gold standard for supporting a mathematical claim is to provide a proof". We propose a retrospective, step-aware formal verification framework $Safe$. Rather than assigning arbitrary scores, we strive to articulate mathematical claims in formal mathematical language Lean 4 at each reasoning step and provide formal proofs to identify hallucinations. We evaluate our framework $Safe$ across multiple language models and various mathematical datasets, demonstrating a significant performance improvement while offering interpretable and verifiable evidence. We also propose $FormalStep$ as a benchmark for step correctness theorem proving with $30,809$ formal statements. To the best of our knowledge, our work represents the first endeavor to utilize formal mathematical language Lean 4 for verifying natural language content generated by LLMs, aligning with the reason why formal mathematical languages were created in the first place: to provide a robust foundation for hallucination-prone human-written proofs.
A MISMATCHED Benchmark for Scientific Natural Language Inference
Authors: Firoz Shaik, Mobashir Sadat, Nikita Gautam, Doina Caragea, Cornelia Caragea
Date: 2025-06-05 00:00:00
Tasks: Articles, Natural Language Inference, Relation, Sentence

Scientific Natural Language Inference (NLI) is the task of predicting the semantic relation between a pair of sentences extracted from research articles. Existing datasets for this task are derived from various computer science (CS) domains, whereas non-CS domains are completely ignored. In this paper, we introduce a novel evaluation benchmark for scientific NLI, called MISMATCHED. The new MISMATCHED benchmark covers three non-CS domains-PSYCHOLOGY, ENGINEERING, and PUBLIC HEALTH, and contains 2,700 human annotated sentence pairs. We establish strong baselines on MISMATCHED using both Pre-trained Small Language Models (SLMs) and Large Language Models (LLMs). Our best performing baseline shows a Macro F1 of only 78.17% illustrating the substantial headroom for future improvements. In addition to introducing the MISMATCHED benchmark, we show that incorporating sentence pairs having an implicit scientific NLI relation between them in model training improves their performance on scientific NLI. We make our dataset and code publicly available on GitHub.