In-context learning (ICL) has transformed the use of large language models (LLMs) for NLP tasks, enabling few-shot learning by conditioning on labeled examples without finetuning. Despite its effectiveness, ICL is prone to errors, especially for challenging examples. With the goal of improving the performance of ICL, we propose corrective in-context learning (CICL), an approach that incorporates a model's incorrect predictions alongside ground truth corrections into the prompt, aiming to enhance classification accuracy through self-correction. However, contrary to our hypothesis, extensive experiments on text classification tasks demonstrate that CICL consistently underperforms standard ICL, with performance degrading as the proportion of corrections in the prompt increases. Our findings indicate that CICL introduces confusion by disrupting the model's task understanding, rather than refining its predictions. Additionally, we observe that presenting harder examples in standard ICL does not improve performance, suggesting that example difficulty alone may not be a reliable criterion for effective selection. By presenting these negative results, we provide important insights into the limitations of self-corrective mechanisms in LLMs and offer directions for future research.

One of that obtaining explanations of idiomatic expressions the main areas of interest for the proponents of in the learner's first language removes many technology-assisted language learning is vocabulary of the barriers to understanding introduced by traditional expansion, where recent studies have demonstrated definition generation systems. We choose a significant impact in student engagement to focus on idiomatic expressions as they are an and increased vocabulary knowledge (Fisher, 2016; important element of language learning that is particularly Guaqueta and Castro-Gárces, 2018; Tao Hao and challenging for learners and automated Ardasheva, 2021). To support the development systems alike. Consider the utterance, he and I of these technologies, considerable work has been don't see eye to eye on a variety of topics. The idiomatic devoted to the study of automated definition generation expression contained within this sentence (Ni and Wang, 2017; Gadetsky et al., 2018; is not composed of particularly challenging words, Ishiwatari et al., 2019; Bevilacqua et al., 2020).

To address an important gap in creating children's stories for vocabulary enrichment, we investigate the automatic evaluation of how well stories convey the semantics of target vocabulary words, a task with substantial implications for generating educational content. We motivate this task, which we call measuring contextual informativeness in children's stories, and provide a formal task definition as well as a dataset for the task. We further propose a method for automating the task using a large language model (LLM). Our experiments show that our approach reaches a Spearman correlation of 0.4983 with human judgments of informativeness, while the strongest baseline only obtains a correlation of 0.3534. An additional analysis shows that the LLM-based approach is able to generalize to measuring contextual informativeness in adult-directed text, on which it also outperforms all baselines.

Language models (LMs) have excelled in various broad domains. However, to ensure their safe and effective integration into real-world educational settings, they must demonstrate proficiency in specific, granular areas of knowledge. Existing cloze-style benchmarks, commonly used to evaluate LMs' knowledge, have three major limitations. They: 1) do not cover the educational domain; 2) typically focus on low-complexity, generic knowledge or broad domains, which do not adequately assess the models' knowledge in specific subjects; and 3) often rely on templates that can bias model predictions. Here, we introduce MALAMUTE, a multilingual, template-free, and highly granular probing dataset comprising expert-written, peer-reviewed probes from 71 university-level textbooks across three languages (English, Spanish, and Polish). MALAMUTE is the first education-based cloze-style dataset. It covers eight domains, each with up to 14 subdomains, further broken down into concepts and concept-based prompts, totaling 33,361 university curriculum concepts and 116,887 prompts. MALAMUTE's fine granularity, educational focus, and inclusion of both sentence-level and paragraph-level prompts make it an ideal tool for evaluating LMs' course-related knowledge. Our evaluation of masked and causal LMs on MALAMUTE shows that despite overall proficiency, they have significant gaps in knowledge when examined closely on specific subjects, hindering their safe use in classrooms and underscoring the need for further development.

Previous work finds that recent long-context language models fail to make equal use of information in the middle of their inputs, preferring pieces of information located at the tail ends which creates an undue bias in situations where we would like models to be equally capable of using different parts of the input. Thus far, the problem has mainly only been considered in settings with single pieces of critical information, leading us to question what happens when multiple necessary pieces of information are spread out over the inputs. Here, we demonstrate the effects of the "lost in the middle" problem in the multi-hop question answering setting -- in which multiple reasoning "hops" over disconnected documents are required -- and show that performance degrades not only with respect to the distance of information from the edges of the context, but also between pieces of information. Additionally, we experiment with means of alleviating the problem by reducing superfluous document contents through knowledge graph triple extraction and summarization, and prompting models to reason more thoroughly using chain-of-thought prompting.

Many of the world's languages have insufficient data to train high-performing general neural machine translation (NMT) models, let alone domain-specific models, and often the only available parallel data are small amounts of religious texts. Hence, domain adaptation (DA) is a crucial issue faced by contemporary NMT and has, so far, been underexplored for low-resource languages. In this paper, we evaluate a set of methods from both low-resource NMT and DA in a realistic setting, in which we aim to translate between a high-resource and a low-resource language with access to only: a) parallel Bible data, b) a bilingual dictionary, and c) a monolingual target-domain corpus in the high-resource language. Our results show that the effectiveness of the tested methods varies, with the simplest one, DALI, being most effective. We follow up with a small human evaluation of DALI, which shows that there is still a need for more careful investigation of how to accomplish DA for low-resource NMT.

Warning: this paper contains content that may be offensive or upsetting Hate speech moderation on global platforms poses unique challenges due to the multimodal and multilingual nature of content, along with the varying cultural perceptions. How well do current vision-language models (VLMs) navigate these nuances? To investigate this, we create the first multimodal and multilingual parallel hate speech dataset, annotated by a multicultural set of annotators, called Multi3Hate. It contains 300 parallel meme samples across 5 languages: English, German, Spanish, Hindi, and Mandarin. We demonstrate that cultural background significantly affects multimodal hate speech annotation in our dataset. The average pairwise agreement among countries is just 74%, significantly lower than that of randomly selected annotator groups. Our qualitative analysis indicates that the lowest pairwise label agreement-only 67% between the USA and India-can be attributed to cultural factors. We then conduct experiments with 5 large VLMs in a zero-shot setting, finding that these models align more closely with annotations from the US than with those from other cultures, even when the memes and prompts are presented in the dominant language of the other culture. Code and dataset are available at https://github.com/MinhDucBui/Multi3Hate.

The evolution of biological neural systems has led to both modularity and sparse coding, which enables efficiency in energy usage, and robustness across the diversity of tasks in the lifespan. In contrast, standard neural networks rely on dense, non-specialized architectures, where all model parameters are simultaneously updated to learn multiple tasks, leading to representation interference. Current sparse neural network approaches aim to alleviate this issue, but are often hindered by limitations such as 1) trainable gating functions that cause representation collapse; 2) non-overlapping experts that result in redundant computation and slow learning; and 3) reliance on explicit input or task IDs that impose significant constraints on flexibility and scalability. In this paper we propose Conditionally Overlapping Mixture of ExperTs (COMET), a general deep learning method that addresses these challenges by inducing a modular, sparse architecture with an exponential number of overlapping experts. COMET replaces the trainable gating function used in Sparse Mixture of Experts with a fixed, biologically inspired random projection applied to individual input representations. This design causes the degree of expert overlap to depend on input similarity, so that similar inputs tend to share more parameters. This facilitates positive knowledge transfer, resulting in faster learning and improved generalization. We demonstrate the effectiveness of COMET on a range of tasks, including image classification, language modeling, and regression, using several popular deep learning architectures.

Natural language processing has seen rapid progress over the past decade. Due to the speed of developments, some practices get established without proper evaluation. Considering one such case and focusing on reading comprehension, we ask our first research question: 1) How does the order of inputs -- i.e., question and context -- affect model performance? Additionally, given recent advancements in input emphasis, we ask a second research question: 2) Does emphasizing either the question, the context, or both enhance performance? Experimenting with 9 large language models across 3 datasets, we find that presenting the context before the question improves model performance, with an accuracy increase of up to $31\%$. Furthermore, emphasizing the context yields superior results compared to question emphasis, and in general, emphasizing parts of the input is particularly effective for addressing questions that models lack the parametric knowledge to answer. Experimenting with both prompt-based and attention-based emphasis methods, we additionally find that the best method is surprisingly simple: it only requires concatenating a few tokens to the input and results in an accuracy improvement of up to $36\%$, allowing smaller models to outperform their significantly larger counterparts.

Current natural language processing (NLP) research tends to focus on only one or, less frequently, two dimensions - e.g., performance, privacy, fairness, or efficiency - at a time, which may lead to suboptimal conclusions and often overlooking the broader goal of achieving trustworthy NLP. Work on adapter modules (Houlsby et al., 2019; Hu et al., 2021) focuses on improving performance and efficiency, with no investigation of unintended consequences on other aspects such as fairness. To address this gap, we conduct experiments on three text classification datasets by either (1) finetuning all parameters or (2) using adapter modules. Regarding performance and efficiency, we confirm prior findings that the accuracy of adapter-enhanced models is roughly on par with that of fully finetuned models, while training time is substantially reduced. Regarding fairness, we show that adapter modules result in mixed fairness across sensitive groups. Further investigation reveals that, when the standard fine-tuned model exhibits limited biases, adapter modules typically do not introduce extra bias. On the other hand, when the finetuned model exhibits increased bias, the impact of adapter modules on bias becomes more unpredictable, introducing the risk of significantly magnifying these biases for certain groups. Our findings highlight the need for a case-by-case evaluation rather than a one-size-fits-all judgment.