In face-to-face interaction, we use multiple modalities, including speech and gestures, to communicate information and resolve references to objects. However, how representational co-speech gestures refer to objects remains understudied from a computational perspective. In this work, we address this gap by introducing a multimodal reference resolution task centred on representational gestures, while simultaneously tackling the challenge of learning robust gesture embeddings. We propose a self-supervised pre-training approach to gesture representation learning that grounds body movements in spoken language. Our experiments show that the learned embeddings align with expert annotations and have significant predictive power. Moreover, reference resolution accuracy further improves when (1) using multimodal gesture representations, even when speech is unavailable at inference time, and (2) leveraging dialogue history. Overall, our findings highlight the complementary roles of gesture and speech in reference resolution, offering a step towards more naturalistic models of human-machine interaction.

We examine three evaluation paradigms: large question-answering benchmarks (e.g., MMLU and BBH), interactive games (e.g., Signalling Games or Taboo), and cognitive tests (e.g., for working memory or theory of mind). First, we investigate which of the former two-benchmarks or games-is most effective at discriminating LLMs of varying quality. Then, inspired by human cognitive assessments, we compile a suite of targeted tests that measure cognitive abilities deemed essential for effective language use, and we investigate their correlation with model performance in benchmarks and games. Our analyses reveal that interactive games are superior to standard benchmarks in discriminating models. Causal and logical reasoning correlate with both static and interactive tests, while differences emerge regarding core executive functions and social/emotional skills, which correlate more with games. We advocate the development of new interactive benchmarks and targeted cognitive tasks inspired by assessing human abilities but designed specifically for LLMs.

The ability to use natural language to talk about visual content is at the core of human intelligence and a crucial feature of any artificial intelligence system. Various studies have focused on generating text for single images. In contrast, comparatively little attention has been paid to exhaustively analyzing and advancing work on multiple-image vision-to-text settings. In this position paper, we claim that any task dealing with temporally ordered sequences of multiple images or frames is an instance of a broader, more general problem involving the understanding of intricate relationships between the visual content and the corresponding text. We comprehensively analyze five tasks that are instances of this problem and argue that they pose a common set of challenges and share similarities in terms of modeling and evaluation approaches. Based on the insights from these various aspects and stages of multi-image-to-text generation, we highlight several open questions and suggest future research directions. We believe that these directions can advance the understanding of complex phenomena in this domain and the development of better models.

Recent generative large language models (LLMs) show remarkable performance in non-English languages, but when prompted in those languages they tend to express higher harmful social biases and toxicity levels. Prior work has shown that finetuning on specialized datasets can mitigate this behavior, and doing so in English can transfer to other languages. In this work, we investigate the impact of different finetuning methods on the model's bias and toxicity, but also on its ability to produce fluent and diverse text. Our results show that finetuning on curated non-harmful text is more effective for mitigating bias, and finetuning on direct preference optimization (DPO) datasets is more effective for mitigating toxicity. The mitigation caused by applying these methods in English also transfers to non-English languages. We find evidence that the extent to which transfer takes place can be predicted by the amount of data in a given language present in the model's pretraining data. However, this transfer of bias and toxicity mitigation often comes at the expense of decreased language generation ability in non-English languages, highlighting the importance of developing language-specific bias and toxicity mitigation methods.

Ambiguity resolution is key to effective communication. While humans effortlessly address ambiguity through conversational grounding strategies, the extent to which current language models can emulate these strategies remains unclear. In this work, we examine referential ambiguity in image-based question answering by introducing RACQUET, a carefully curated dataset targeting distinct aspects of ambiguity. Through a series of evaluations, we reveal significant limitations and problems of overconfidence of state-of-the-art large multimodal language models in addressing ambiguity in their responses. The overconfidence issue becomes particularly relevant for RACQUET-BIAS, a subset designed to analyze a critical yet underexplored problem: failing to address ambiguity leads to stereotypical, socially biased responses. Our results underscore the urgency of equipping models with robust strategies to deal with uncertainty without resorting to undesirable stereotypes.

Generative large language models (LLMs) have been shown to exhibit harmful biases and stereotypes. While safety fine-tuning typically takes place in English, if at all, these models are being used by speakers of many different languages. There is existing evidence that the performance of these models is inconsistent across languages and that they discriminate based on demographic factors of the user. Motivated by this, we investigate whether the social stereotypes exhibited by LLMs differ as a function of the language used to prompt them, while controlling for cultural differences and task accuracy. To this end, we present MBBQ (Multilingual Bias Benchmark for Question-answering), a carefully curated version of the English BBQ dataset extended to Dutch, Spanish, and Turkish, which measures stereotypes commonly held across these languages. We further complement MBBQ with a parallel control dataset to measure task performance on the question-answering task independently of bias. Our results based on several open-source and proprietary LLMs confirm that some non-English languages suffer from bias more than English, even when controlling for cultural shifts. Moreover, we observe significant cross-lingual differences in bias behaviour for all except the most accurate models. With the release of MBBQ, we hope to encourage further research on bias in multilingual settings. The dataset and code are available at https://github.com/Veranep/MBBQ.

For both human speakers and which we test in a zero-shot manner. We machine learning models, the task requires connecting show that LLaVA (Liu et al., 2024), a powerful the visual data causally, to generate a narrative foundation model, performs best on the task, but consistent with the contents of the images. As for only slightly so than TAPM (Yu et al., 2021), a model-generated stories, evaluation is one of the model designed for visual storytelling which is 50 key challenges due to the inherently creative nature times smaller than LLaVA. Second, given insights of the task. Since human-written stories are derived from our proposed distance-based evaluation typically used to train visual storytelling models-- method, we upgrade the visual and language under the assumption that these stories provide a components on TAPM, resulting in a model that good learning signal--most previous work evaluated achieves comparable performance to LLaVA with model-generated stories by directly comparing a significantly lower number of parameters.

Ensuring the verifiability of model answers is a fundamental challenge for retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) in the question answering (QA) domain. Recently, self-citation prompting was proposed to make large language models (LLMs) generate citations to supporting documents along with their answers. However, self-citing LLMs often struggle to match the required format, refer to non-existent sources, and fail to faithfully reflect LLMs' context usage throughout the generation. In this work, we present MIRAGE --Model Internals-based RAG Explanations -- a plug-and-play approach using model internals for faithful answer attribution in RAG applications. MIRAGE detects context-sensitive answer tokens and pairs them with retrieved documents contributing to their prediction via saliency methods. We evaluate our proposed approach on a multilingual extractive QA dataset, finding high agreement with human answer attribution. On open-ended QA, MIRAGE achieves citation quality and efficiency comparable to self-citation while also allowing for a finer-grained control of attribution parameters. Our qualitative evaluation highlights the faithfulness of MIRAGE's attributions and underscores the promising application of model internals for RAG answer attribution.

There is an increasing trend towards evaluating NLP models with LLM-generated judgments instead of human judgments. In the absence of a comparison against human data, this raises concerns about the validity of these evaluations; in case they are conducted with proprietary models, this also raises concerns over reproducibility. We provide JUDGE-BENCH, a collection of 20 NLP datasets with human annotations, and comprehensively evaluate 11 current LLMs, covering both open-weight and proprietary models, for their ability to replicate the annotations. Our evaluations show that each LLM exhibits a large variance across datasets in its correlation to human judgments. We conclude that LLMs are not yet ready to systematically replace human judges in NLP.

Conversation requires a substantial amount of coordination between dialogue participants, from managing turn taking to negotiating mutual understanding. Part of this coordination effort surfaces as the reuse of linguistic behaviour across speakers, a process often referred to as alignment. While the presence of linguistic alignment is well documented in the literature, several questions remain open, including the extent to which patterns of reuse across speakers have an impact on the emergence of labelling conventions for novel referents. In this study, we put forward a methodology for automatically detecting shared lemmatised constructions -- expressions with a common lexical core used by both speakers within a dialogue -- and apply it to a referential communication corpus where participants aim to identify novel objects for which no established labels exist. Our analyses uncover the usage patterns of shared constructions in interaction and reveal that features such as their frequency and the amount of different constructions used for a referent are associated with the degree of object labelling convergence the participants exhibit after social interaction. More generally, the present study shows that automatically detected shared constructions offer a useful level of analysis to investigate the dynamics of reference negotiation in dialogue.