V ague temporal adverbials, such as "recently," "just" and "long time ago," describe the temporal distance between a past event and the utterance time, but leave the exact duration underspec-ified. In this paper, we introduce a factorized model that captures the semantics of these adverbials as probabilistic distributions. These distributions are composed with event-specific distributions to yield a contextualized meaning for an adverbial applied to a specific event. We fit the model's parameters using existing data capturing judgements of native speakers regarding the applicability of these vague temporal adverbials to events that took place a given time ago. Comparing our approach to a non-factorized model based on a single Gaussian distribution for each pair of event and temporal adverbial, we find out that, while both models have similar predictive power, our model is preferable in terms of Occam's razor, as it is simpler and has a better extendability.

Language models serve as proxies for human preference judgements in alignment and evaluation, yet they exhibit systematic miscalibration, prioritizing superficial patterns over substantive qualities. This bias manifests as overreliance on features like length, structure, and style, leading to issues like reward hacking and unreliable evaluations. Evidence suggests these biases originate in artifacts in human training data. In this work, we systematically investigate the relationship between training data biases and preference model miscalibration across five idiosyncratic features of language model generations: length, structure, jargon, sycophancy and vagueness. Using controlled counterfactual pairs, we first quantify the extent to which preference models favor responses with magnified biases (skew), finding this preference occurs in >60% of instances, and model preferences show high miscalibration (~40%) compared to human preferences. Notably, bias features only show mild negative correlations to human preference labels (mean r_human = -0.12) but show moderately strong positive correlations with labels from a strong reward model (mean r_model = +0.36), suggesting that models may overrely on spurious cues. To mitigate these issues, we propose a simple post-training method based on counterfactual data augmentation (CDA) using synthesized contrastive examples. Finetuning models with CDA reduces average miscalibration from 39.4% to 32.5% and average absolute skew difference from 20.5% to 10.0%, while maintaining overall RewardBench performance, showing that targeted debiasing is effective for building reliable preference models.

People in the real world often possess vague knowledge of future payoffs, for which quantification is not feasible or desirable. We argue that language, with differing ability to convey vague information, plays an important but less-known role in representing subjective expectations. Empirically, we find that in their reports, analysts include useful information in linguistic expressions but not numerical forecasts. Specifically, the textual tone of analyst reports has predictive power for forecast errors and subsequent revisions in numerical forecasts, and this relation becomes stronger when analyst's language is vaguer, when uncertainty is higher, and when analysts are busier. Overall, our theory and evidence suggest that some useful information is vaguely known and only communicated through language.

Robot task planning decomposes human instructions into executable action sequences that enable robots to complete a series of complex tasks. Although recent large language model (LLM)-based task planners achieve amazing performance, they assume that human instructions are clear and straightforward. However, real-world users are not experts, and their instructions to robots often contain significant vagueness. Linguists suggest that such vagueness frequently arises from referring expressions (REs), whose meanings depend heavily on dialogue context and environment. This vagueness is even more prevalent among the elderly and children, who robots should serve more. This paper studies how such vagueness in REs within human instructions affects LLM-based robot task planning and how to overcome this issue. To this end, we propose the first robot task planning benchmark with vague REs (REI-Bench), where we discover that the vagueness of REs can severely degrade robot planning performance, leading to success rate drops of up to 77.9%. We also observe that most failure cases stem from missing objects in planners. To mitigate the REs issue, we propose a simple yet effective approach: task-oriented context cognition, which generates clear instructions for robots, achieving state-of-the-art performance compared to aware prompt and chains of thought. This work contributes to the research community of human-robot interaction (HRI) by making robot task planning more practical, particularly for non-expert users, e.g., the elderly and children.

Complex claim fact-checking performs a crucial role in disinformation detection. Moreover, evidence redundancy, where nonessential information complicates the verification process, remains a significant issue. To tackle these limitations, we propose Bilateral De fusing V erification ( BiDeV), a novel fact-checking working-flow framework integrating multiple role-played LLMs to mimic the human-expert fact-checking process. BiDeV consists of two main modules: V agueness Defusing identifies latent information and resolves complex relations to simplify the claim, and Redundancy Defusing eliminates redundant content to enhance the evidence quality. Extensive experimental results on two widely used challenging fact-checking benchmarks (Hover and Feverous-s) demonstrate that our BiDeV can achieve the best performance under both gold and open settings. This highlights the effectiveness of BiDeV in handling complex claims and ensuring precise fact-checking 1 . Introduction Fact-checking is crucial for claim verification by collecting relevant evidence and determining their veracity (Guo, Schlichtkrull, and Vlachos 2022).

Automatic Affect Prediction (AAP) uses computational analysis of input data such as text, speech, images, and physiological signals to predict various affective phenomena (e.g., emotions or moods). These models are typically constructed using supervised machine-learning algorithms, which rely heavily on labeled training datasets. In this position paper, we posit that all AAP training data are derived from human Affective Interpretation Processes, resulting in a form of Affective Meaning. Research on human affect indicates a form of complexity that is fundamental to such meaning: it can possess what we refer to here broadly as Qualities of Indeterminacy (QIs) - encompassing Subjectivity (meaning depends on who is interpreting), Uncertainty (lack of confidence regarding meanings' correctness), Ambiguity (meaning contains mutually exclusive concepts) and Vagueness (meaning is situated at different levels in a nested hierarchy). Failing to appropriately consider QIs leads to results incapable of meaningful and reliable predictions. Based on this premise, we argue that a crucial step in adequately addressing indeterminacy in AAP is the development of data collection practices for modeling corpora that involve the systematic consideration of 1) a relevant set of QIs and 2) context for the associated interpretation processes. To this end, we are 1) outlining a conceptual model of AIPs and the QIs associated with the meaning these produce and a conceptual structure of relevant context, supporting understanding of its role. Finally, we use our framework for 2) discussing examples of context-sensitivity-related challenges for addressing QIs in data collection setups. We believe our efforts can stimulate a structured discussion of both the role of aspects of indeterminacy and context in research on AAP, informing the development of better practices for data collection and analysis.

This paper is about structures output predictions analysis under'fairness' constraint. This paper shows that constraints relative to fairness can help to increases accuracies. Fairness is one of the notion whose importance is rising in our community, and this paper give interesting insights about it. One of the main issue raised by one of the reviewer that pleads for non acceptance is the "vagueness" of the definition of fairness here. I personally think that this issue should not be taken to much into account here, there is still in our community some "vagueness" according to what the good definition should be.

Recent research in Vision Language Navigation (VLN) has overlooked the development of agents' inquisitive abilities, which allow them to ask clarifying questions when instructions are incomplete. This paper addresses how agents can recognize "when" they lack sufficient information, without focusing on "what" is missing, particularly in VLN tasks with vague instructions. Equipping agents with this ability enhances efficiency by reducing potential digressions and seeking timely assistance. The challenge in identifying such uncertain points is balancing between being overly cautious (high recall) and overly confident (high precision). W e propose an attention-based instruction-vagueness estimation module that learns associations between instructions and the agent's trajectory. By leveraging instruction-to-path alignment information during training, the module's vagueness estimation performance improves by around 52% in terms of precision-recall balance. In our ablative experiments, we also demonstrate the effectiveness of incorporating this additional instruction-to-path attention network alongside the cross-modal attention networks within the navigator module. Our results show that the attention scores from the instruction-to-path attention network serve as better indicators for estimating vagueness.

Multi-view learning methods often focus on improving decision accuracy, while neglecting the decision uncertainty, limiting their suitability for safety-critical applications. To mitigate this, researchers propose trusted multi-view learning methods that estimate classification probabilities and uncertainty by learning the class distributions for each instance. However, these methods assume that the data from each view can effectively differentiate all categories, ignoring the semantic vagueness phenomenon in real-world multi-view data. Our findings demonstrate that this phenomenon significantly suppresses the learning of view-specific evidence in existing methods. We propose a Consistent and Complementary-aware trusted Multi-view Learning (CCML) method to solve this problem. We first construct view opinions using evidential deep neural networks, which consist of belief mass vectors and uncertainty estimates. Next, we dynamically decouple the consistent and complementary evidence. The consistent evidence is derived from the shared portions across all views, while the complementary evidence is obtained by averaging the differing portions across all views. We ensure that the opinion constructed from the consistent evidence strictly aligns with the ground-truth category. For the opinion constructed from the complementary evidence, we allow it for potential vagueness in the evidence. We compare CCML with state-of-the-art baselines on one synthetic and six real-world datasets. The results validate the effectiveness of the dynamic evidence decoupling strategy and show that CCML significantly outperforms baselines on accuracy and reliability. The code is released at https://github.com/Lihong-Liu/CCML.

This paper presents the HYBRINFOX method used to solve Task 2 of Subjectivity detection of the CLEF 2024 CheckThat! competition. The specificity of the method is to use a hybrid system, combining a RoBERTa model, fine-tuned for subjectivity detection, a frozen sentence-BERT (sBERT) model to capture semantics, and several scores calculated by the English version of the expert system VAGO, developed independently of this task to measure vagueness and subjectivity in texts based on the lexicon. In English, the HYBRINFOX method ranked 1st with a macro F1 score of 0.7442 on the evaluation data. For the other languages, the method used a translation step into English, producing more mixed results (ranking 1st in Multilingual and 2nd in Italian over the baseline, but under the baseline in Bulgarian, German, and Arabic). We explain the principles of our hybrid approach, and outline ways in which the method could be improved for other languages besides English.