Large language models (LLMs) are now used in settings such as Google's AI Overviews, where it summarizes multiple long documents. However, it remains unclear whether they weight all inputs equally. Focusing on abortion-related news, we construct 40 pro-neutral-con article triplets, permute each triplet into six input orders, and prompt Gemini 2.5 Flash to generate a neutral overview. We evaluate each summary against its source articles using ROUGE-L (lexical overlap), BERTScore (semantic similarity), and SummaC (factual consistency). One-way ANOVA reveals a significant primacy effect for BERTScore across all stances, indicating that summaries are more semantically aligned with the first-seen article. Pairwise comparisons further show that Position 1 differs significantly from Positions 2 and 3, while the latter two do not differ from each other, confirming a selective preference for the first document. The findings present risks for applications that rely on LLM-generated overviews and for agentic AI systems, where the steps involving LLMs can disproportionately influence downstream actions.

This paper presents a comprehensive evaluation of the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) in metaphor interpretation across multiple datasets, tasks, and prompt configurations. Although metaphor processing has gained significant attention in Natural Language Processing (NLP), previous research has been limited to single-dataset evaluations and specific task settings, often using artificially constructed data through lexical replacement. We address these limitations by conducting extensive experiments using diverse publicly available datasets with inference and metaphor annotations, focusing on Natural Language Inference (NLI) and Question Answering (QA) tasks. The results indicate that LLMs' performance is more influenced by features like lexical overlap and sentence length than by metaphorical content, demonstrating that any alleged emergent abilities of LLMs to understand metaphorical language are the result of a combination of surface-level features, in-context learning, and linguistic knowledge. This work provides critical insights into the current capabilities and limitations of LLMs in processing figurative language, highlighting the need for more realistic evaluation frameworks in metaphor interpretation tasks. Data and code are publicly available.

In specialized fields like the scientific domain, constructing large-scale human-annotated datasets poses a significant challenge due to the need for domain expertise. Recent methods have employed large language models to generate synthetic queries, which serve as proxies for actual user queries. However, they lack control over the content generated, often resulting in incomplete coverage of academic concepts in documents. We introduce Concept Coverage-based Query set Generation (CCQGen) framework, designed to generate a set of queries with comprehensive coverage of the document's concepts. A key distinction of CCQGen is that it adaptively adjusts the generation process based on the previously generated queries. We identify concepts not sufficiently covered by previous queries, and leverage them as conditions for subsequent query generation. This approach guides each new query to complement the previous ones, aiding in a thorough understanding of the document. Extensive experiments demonstrate that CCQGen significantly enhances query quality and retrieval performance.

Recent research has focused on literary machine translation (MT) as a new challenge in MT. However, the evaluation of literary MT remains an open problem. We contribute to this ongoing discussion by introducing LITEVAL-CORPUS, a paragraph-level parallel corpus comprising multiple verified human translations and outputs from 9 MT systems, which totals over 2k paragraphs and includes 13k annotated sentences across four language pairs, costing 4.5k Euro. This corpus enables us to (i) examine the consistency and adequacy of multiple annotation schemes, (ii) compare evaluations by students and professionals, and (iii) assess the effectiveness of LLM-based metrics. We find that Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM), as the de facto standard in non-literary human MT evaluation, is inadequate for literary translation: While Best-Worst Scaling (BWS) with students and Scalar Quality Metric (SQM) with professional translators prefer human translations at rates of ~82% and ~94%, respectively, MQM with student annotators prefers human professional translations over the translations of the best-performing LLMs in only ~42% of cases. While automatic metrics generally show a moderate correlation with human MQM and SQM, they struggle to accurately identify human translations, with rates of at most ~20%. Our overall evaluation indicates that human professional translations consistently outperform LLM translations, where even the most recent LLMs tend to produce more literal and less diverse translations compared to human translations. However, newer LLMs such as GPT-4o perform substantially better than older ones.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in various natural language processing tasks. However, LLMs may rely on dataset biases as shortcuts for prediction, which can significantly impair their robustness and generalization capabilities. This paper presents Shortcut Suite, a comprehensive test suite designed to evaluate the impact of shortcuts on LLMs' performance, incorporating six shortcut types, five evaluation metrics, and four prompting strategies. Our extensive experiments yield several key findings: 1) LLMs demonstrate varying reliance on shortcuts for downstream tasks, significantly impairing their performance. 2) Larger LLMs are more likely to utilize shortcuts under zero-shot and few-shot in-context learning prompts. 3) Chain-of-thought prompting notably reduces shortcut reliance and outperforms other prompting strategies, while few-shot prompts generally underperform compared to zero-shot prompts. 4) LLMs often exhibit overconfidence in their predictions, especially when dealing with datasets that contain shortcuts. 5) LLMs generally have a lower explanation quality in shortcut-laden datasets, with errors falling into three types: distraction, disguised comprehension, and logical fallacy. Our findings offer new insights for evaluating robustness and generalization in LLMs and suggest potential directions for mitigating the reliance on shortcuts. The code is available at \url {https://github.com/yyhappier/ShortcutSuite.git}.

We explore which linguistic factors -- at the sentence and token level -- play an important role in influencing language model predictions, and investigate whether these are reflective of results found in humans and human corpora (Gries and Kootstra, 2017). We make use of the structural priming paradigm, where recent exposure to a structure facilitates processing of the same structure. We don't only investigate whether, but also where priming effects occur, and what factors predict them. We show that these effects can be explained via the inverse frequency effect, known in human priming, where rarer elements within a prime increase priming effects, as well as lexical dependence between prime and target. Our results provide an important piece in the puzzle of understanding how properties within their context affect structural prediction in language models.

Despite their remarkable successes, state-of-the-art language models face challenges in grasping certain important semantic details. This paper introduces the VISLA (Variance and Invariance to Semantic and Lexical Alterations) benchmark, designed to evaluate the semantic and lexical understanding of language models. VISLA presents a 3-way semantic (in)equivalence task with a triplet of sentences associated with an image, to evaluate both vision-language models (VLMs) and unimodal language models (ULMs). An evaluation involving 34 VLMs and 20 ULMs reveals surprising difficulties in distinguishing between lexical and semantic variations. Spatial semantics encoded by language models also appear to be highly sensitive to lexical information. Notably, text encoders of VLMs demonstrate greater sensitivity to semantic and lexical variations than unimodal text encoders. Our contributions include the unification of image-to-text and text-to-text retrieval tasks, an off-the-shelf evaluation without fine-tuning, and assessing LMs' semantic (in)variance in the presence of lexical alterations. The results highlight strengths and weaknesses across diverse vision and unimodal language models, contributing to a deeper understanding of their capabilities. % VISLA enables a rigorous evaluation, shedding light on language models' capabilities in handling semantic and lexical nuances. Data and code will be made available at https://github.com/Sri-Harsha/visla_benchmark.

Paralinguistic traits like cognitive load and emotion are increasingly recognized as pivotal areas in speech recognition research, often examined through specialized datasets like CLSE and IEMOCAP. However, the integrity of these datasets is seldom scrutinized for text-dependency. This paper critically evaluates the prevalent assumption that machine learning models trained on such datasets genuinely learn to identify paralinguistic traits, rather than merely capturing lexical features. By examining the lexical overlap in these datasets and testing the performance of machine learning models, we expose significant text-dependency in trait-labeling. Our results suggest that some machine learning models, especially large pre-trained models like HuBERT, might inadvertently focus on lexical characteristics rather than the intended paralinguistic features. The study serves as a call to action for the research community to reevaluate the reliability of existing datasets and methodologies, ensuring that machine learning models genuinely learn what they are designed to recognize.

Exploring and quantifying semantic relatedness is central to representing language. It holds significant implications across various NLP tasks, including offering insights into the capabilities and performance of Large Language Models (LLMs). While earlier NLP research primarily focused on semantic similarity, often within the English language context, we instead investigate the broader phenomenon of semantic relatedness. In this paper, we present SemRel, a new semantic relatedness dataset collection annotated by native speakers across 14 languages:Afrikaans, Algerian Arabic, Amharic, English, Hausa, Hindi, Indonesian, Kinyarwanda, Marathi, Moroccan Arabic, Modern Standard Arabic, Punjabi, Spanish, and Telugu. These languages originate from five distinct language families and are predominantly spoken in Africa and Asia -- regions characterised by a relatively limited availability of NLP resources. Each instance in the SemRel datasets is a sentence pair associated with a score that represents the degree of semantic textual relatedness between the two sentences. The scores are obtained using a comparative annotation framework. We describe the data collection and annotation processes, related challenges when building the datasets, and their impact and utility in NLP. We further report experiments for each language and across the different languages.

In modern dialogue systems, the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) has grown exponentially due to their capacity to generate diverse, relevant, and creative responses. Despite their strengths, striking a balance between the LLMs' creativity and their faithfulness to external knowledge remains a key challenge. This paper presents an innovative user-controllable mechanism that modulates the balance between an LLM's imaginative capabilities and its adherence to factual information. Our approach incorporates a numerical tag during the fine-tuning phase of the LLM's training, representing the degree of faithfulness to the reference knowledge in the generated responses. This degree is computed through an automated process that measures lexical overlap using ROUGE scores, semantic similarity using Sentence-BERT embeddings, and an LLM's self-evaluation score. During model inference, users can manipulate this numerical tag, thus controlling the degree of the LLM's reliance on external knowledge. We conduct extensive experiments across various scenarios, demonstrating the adaptability of our method and its efficacy in ensuring the quality and accuracy of the LLM's responses. The results highlight the potential of our approach to enhance the versatility of LLMs while maintaining a balance between creativity and hallucination.