Cryptic crosswords, the dominant crossword variety in the UK, are a promising target for advancing NLP systems that seek to process semantically complex, highly compositional language. Cryptic clues read like fluent natural language but are adversarially composed of two parts: a definition and a wordplay cipher requiring character-level manipulations. Expert humans use creative intelligence to solve cryptics, flexibly combining linguistic, world, and domain knowledge. In this paper, we make two main contributions. First, we present a dataset of cryptic clues as a challenging new benchmark for NLP systems that seek to process compositional language in more creative, human-like ways. After showing that three non-neural approaches and T5, a state-of-the-art neural language model, do not achieve good performance, we make our second main contribution: a novel curriculum approach, in which the model is first fine-tuned on related tasks such as unscrambling words. We also introduce a challenging data split, examine the meta-linguistic capabilities of subword-tokenized models, and investigate model systematicity by perturbing the wordplay part of clues, showing that T5 exhibits behavior partially consistent with human solving strategies. Although our curricular approach considerably improves on the T5 baseline, our best-performing model still fails to generalize to the extent that humans can. Thus, cryptic crosswords remain an unsolved challenge for NLP systems and a potential source of future innovation.

In recent years, significant advancements in the field of Natural Language Processing (NLP) have positioned commercialized language models as wide-reaching, highly useful tools. In tandem, there has been an explosion of multidisciplinary research examining how NLP tasks reflect, perpetuate, and amplify social biases such as gender and racial bias. A significant gap in this scholarship is a detailed analysis of how queer sexualities are encoded and (mis)represented by both NLP systems and practitioners. Following previous work in the field of AI fairness, we document how sexuality is defined and operationalized via a survey and analysis of 55 articles that quantify sexuality-based NLP bias. We find that sexuality is not clearly defined in a majority of the literature surveyed, indicating a reliance on assumed or normative conceptions of sexual/romantic practices and identities. Further, we find that methods for extracting biased outputs from NLP technologies often conflate gender and sexual identities, leading to monolithic conceptions of queerness and thus improper quantifications of bias. With the goal of improving sexuality-based NLP bias analyses, we conclude with recommendations that encourage more thorough engagement with both queer communities and interdisciplinary literature.

A Pre - Purchase Evaluation and Comparative Study of Solutions from A WS, Google, Azure, John Snow Labs, and Open - Source Models on an Independent Pediatric Dataset Shruti Hegde MS, Mabon Manoj Ninan BS, Jonathan R. Dillman MD, MSc, Shireen Hayatghaibi PhD, Lynn Babcock MD, Elanchezhian Somasundaram PhD Abstract Purpose: General purpose clinical natural language processing tools are increasingly used for the automatic labeling of clinical reports to support various clinical, research and quality improvement applications. However, independent performance evaluations for specific tasks, such as labeling pediatric chest radiograph reports, remain scarce. This study aims to compare four leading commercial clinical NLP systems for entity extraction and assertion detection of clinically relevant findings in pediatric chest radiog raph reports . In addition, the study evaluates two dedicated chest radiograph report labelers, CheXpert and CheXbert, to provide a comprehensive performance comparison of the systems in extracting disease labels defined by CheXpert. Methods: A total of 95,008 pediatric chest radiograph (CXR) reports were obtained from a large academic pediatric hospital for this IRB - waived study. Clinically relevant terms were extracted using four general - purpose clinical NLP systems: Amazon Comprehend Medical (AWS), Google Healthcare NLP (GC), Azure Clinical NLP (AZ), and SparkNLP (SP) from John Snow Labs. After standardization, entities and their assertion statuses (positive, negative, uncertain) from the findings and impression sec tions were analyzed using descriptive statistics, paired t - tests, and Chi - square tests . Entities from the I mpression sections were mapped to 12 disease categories plus a No Findin gs category using a regular expression algorithm. In parallel, CheXpert and CheXbert processed the same reports to extract the same 13 categories (12 disease categories and a No Findings category) . Outputs from all six models were compared using Fleiss' Kappa across the assertion categories .

Recent research has highlighted that natural language processing (NLP) systems exhibit a bias against African American speakers. The bias errors are often caused by poor representation of linguistic features unique to African American English (AAE), due to the relatively low probability of occurrence of many such features in training data. We present a workflow to overcome such bias in the case of habitual "be". Habitual "be" is isomorphic, and therefore ambiguous, with other forms of "be" found in both AAE and other varieties of English. This creates a clear challenge for bias in NLP technologies. To overcome the scarcity, we employ a combination of rule-based filters and data augmentation that generate a corpus balanced between habitual and non-habitual instances. With this balanced corpus, we train unbiased machine learning classifiers, as demonstrated on a corpus of AAE transcribed texts, achieving .65 F$_1$ score disambiguating habitual "be".

Human-Centric NLP often claims to prioritise human needs and values, yet many implementations reveal an underlying AI-centric focus. Through an analysis of case studies in language modelling, behavioural testing, and multi-modal alignment, this study identifies a significant gap between the ideas of human-centricity and actual practices. Key issues include misalignment with human-centred design principles, the reduction of human factors to mere benchmarks, and insufficient consideration of real-world impacts. The discussion explores whether Human-Centric NLP embodies true human-centred design, emphasising the need for interdisciplinary collaboration and ethical considerations. The paper advocates for a redefinition of Human-Centric NLP, urging a broader focus on real-world utility and societal implications to ensure that language technologies genuinely serve and empower users.

Adversarial examples, which are inputs deliberately perturbed with imperceptible changes to induce model errors, have raised serious concerns for the reliability and security of deep neural networks (DNNs). While adversarial attacks have been extensively studied in continuous data domains such as images, the discrete nature of text presents unique challenges. In this paper, we propose Irony-based Adversarial Examples (IAE), a method that transforms straightforward sentences into ironic ones to create adversarial text. This approach exploits the rhetorical device of irony, where the intended meaning is opposite to the literal interpretation, requiring a deeper understanding of context to detect. The IAE method is particularly challenging due to the need to accurately locate evaluation words, substitute them with appropriate collocations, and expand the text with suitable ironic elements while maintaining semantic coherence. Our research makes the following key contributions: (1) We introduce IAE, a strategy for generating textual adversarial examples using irony. This method does not rely on pre-existing irony corpora, making it a versatile tool for creating adversarial text in various NLP tasks. (2) We demonstrate that the performance of several state-of-the-art deep learning models on sentiment analysis tasks significantly deteriorates when subjected to IAE attacks. This finding underscores the susceptibility of current NLP systems to adversarial manipulation through irony. (3) We compare the impact of IAE on human judgment versus NLP systems, revealing that humans are less susceptible to the effects of irony in text.

This position paper proposes a novel approach to advancing NLP security by leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs) as engines for generating diverse adversarial attacks. Building upon recent work demonstrating LLMs' effectiveness in creating word-level adversarial examples, we argue for expanding this concept to encompass a broader range of attack types, including adversarial patches, universal perturbations, and targeted attacks. We posit that LLMs' sophisticated language understanding and generation capabilities can produce more effective, semantically coherent, and human-like adversarial examples across various domains and classifier architectures. This paradigm shift in adversarial NLP has far-reaching implications, potentially enhancing model robustness, uncovering new vulnerabilities, and driving innovation in defense mechanisms. By exploring this new frontier, we aim to contribute to the development of more secure, reliable, and trustworthy NLP systems for critical applications.

Cryptic crosswords, the dominant crossword variety in the UK, are a promising target for advancing NLP systems that seek to process semantically complex, highly compositional language. Cryptic clues read like fluent natural language but are adversarially composed of two parts: a definition and a wordplay cipher requiring character-level manipulations. Expert humans use creative intelligence to solve cryptics, flexibly combining linguistic, world, and domain knowledge. In this paper, we make two main contributions. First, we present a dataset of cryptic clues as a challenging new benchmark for NLP systems that seek to process compositional language in more creative, human-like ways.

While NLP research into hate speech detection has grown exponentially in the last three decades, there has been minimal uptake or engagement from policy makers and non-profit organisations. We argue the absence of ethical frameworks have contributed to this rift between current practice and best practice. By adopting appropriate ethical frameworks, NLP researchers may enable the social impact potential of hate speech research. This position paper is informed by reviewing forty-eight hate speech detection systems associated with thirty-seven publications from different venues.

Language technologies have made enormous progress, especially with the introduction of large language models (LLMs). On traditional tasks such as machine translation and sentiment analysis, these models perform at near-human level. These advances can, however, exacerbate a variety of issues that models have traditionally struggled with, such as bias, evaluation, and risks. In this position paper, we argue that many of these issues share a common core: a lack of awareness of the factors, context, and implications of the social environment in which NLP operates, which we call social awareness. While NLP is getting better at solving the formal linguistic aspects, limited progress has been made in adding the social awareness required for language applications to work in all situations for all users. Integrating social awareness into NLP models will make applications more natural, helpful, and safe, and will open up new possibilities. Thus we argue that substantial challenges remain for NLP to develop social awareness and that we are just at the beginning of a new era for the field.