Table-Text Alignment: Explaining Claim Verification Against Tables in Scientific Papers

Scientific claim verification against tables typically requires predicting whether a claim is supported or refuted given a table. However, we argue that predicting the final label alone is insufficient: it reveals little about the model's reasoning and offers limited interpretability. To address this, we reframe table-text alignment as an explanation task, requiring models to identify the table cells essential for claim verification. We build a new dataset by extending the SciTab benchmark with human-annotated cell-level rationales. Annotators verify the claim label and highlight the minimal set of cells needed to support their decision. After the annotation process, we utilize the collected information and propose a taxonomy for handling ambiguous cases. Our experiments show that (i) incorporating table alignment information improves claim verification performance, and (ii) most LLMs, while often predicting correct labels, fail to recover human-aligned rationales, suggesting that their predictions do not stem from faithful reasoning.

An Analysis of Datasets, Metrics and Models in Keyphrase Generation

Keyphrase generation refers to the task of producing a set of words or phrases that summarises the content of a document. Continuous efforts have been dedicated to this task over the past few years, spreading across multiple lines of research, such as model architectures, data resources, and use-case scenarios. Yet, the current state of keyphrase generation remains unknown as there has been no attempt to review and analyse previous work. In this paper, we bridge this gap by presenting an analysis of over 50 research papers on keyphrase generation, offering a comprehensive overview of recent progress, limitations, and open challenges. Our findings highlight several critical issues in current evaluation practices, such as the concerning similarity among commonly-used benchmark datasets and inconsistencies in metric calculations leading to overestimated performances. Additionally, we address the limited availability of pre-trained models by releasing a strong PLM-based model for keyphrase generation as an effort to facilitate future research.

No Stupid Questions: An Analysis of Question Query Generation for Citation Recommendation

Existing techniques for citation recommendation are constrained by their adherence to article contents and metadata. We leverage GPT-4o-mini's latent expertise as an inquisitive assistant by instructing it to ask questions which, when answered, could expose new insights about an excerpt from a scientific article. We evaluate the utility of these questions as retrieval queries, measuring their effectiveness in retrieving and ranking masked target documents. In some cases, generated questions ended up being better queries than extractive keyword queries generated by the same model. We additionally propose MMR-RBO, a variation of Maximal Marginal Relevance (MMR) using Rank-Biased Overlap (RBO) to identify which questions will perform competitively with the keyword baseline. As all question queries yield unique result sets, we contend that there are no stupid questions.

Beyond Chains: Bridging Large Language Models and Knowledge Bases in Complex Question Answering

Knowledge Base Question Answering (KBQA) aims to answer natural language questions using structured knowledge from KBs. While LLM-only approaches offer generalization, they suffer from outdated knowledge, hallucinations, and lack of transparency. Chain-based KG-RAG methods address these issues by incorporating external KBs, but are limited to simple chain-structured questions due to the absence of planning and logical structuring. Inspired by semantic parsing methods, we propose PDRR: a four-stage framework consisting of Predict, Decompose, Retrieve, and Reason. Our method first predicts the question type and decomposes the question into structured triples. Then retrieves relevant information from KBs and guides the LLM as an agent to reason over and complete the decomposed triples. Experimental results demonstrate that PDRR consistently outperforms existing methods across various LLM backbones and achieves superior performance on both chain-structured and non-chain complex questions.

Med-CoDE: Medical Critique based Disagreement Evaluation Framework

The emergence of large language models (LLMs) has significantly influenced numerous fields, including healthcare, by enhancing the capabilities of automated systems to process and generate human-like text. However, despite their advancements, the reliability and accuracy of LLMs in medical contexts remain critical concerns. Current evaluation methods often lack robustness and fail to provide a comprehensive assessment of LLM performance, leading to potential risks in clinical settings. In this work, we propose Med-CoDE, a specifically designed evaluation framework for medical LLMs to address these challenges. The framework leverages a critique-based approach to quantitatively measure the degree of disagreement between model-generated responses and established medical ground truths. This framework captures both accuracy and reliability in medical settings. The proposed evaluation framework aims to fill the existing gap in LLM assessment by offering a systematic method to evaluate the quality and trustworthiness of medical LLMs. Through extensive experiments and case studies, we illustrate the practicality of our framework in providing a comprehensive and reliable evaluation of medical LLMs.

LLM-as-a-Judge: Reassessing the Performance of LLMs in Extractive QA

Extractive reading comprehension question answering (QA) datasets are typically evaluated using Exact Match (EM) and F1-score, but these metrics often fail to fully capture model performance. With the success of large language models (LLMs), they have been employed in various tasks, including serving as judges (LLM-as-a-judge). In this paper, we reassess the performance of QA models using LLM-as-a-judge across four reading comprehension QA datasets. We examine different families of LLMs and various answer types to evaluate the effectiveness of LLM-as-a-judge in these tasks. Our results show that LLM-as-a-judge is highly correlated with human judgments and can replace traditional EM/F1 metrics. By using LLM-as-a-judge, the correlation with human judgments improves significantly, from 0.17 (EM) and 0.36 (F1-score) to 0.85. These findings confirm that EM and F1 metrics underestimate the true performance of the QA models. While LLM-as-a-judge is not perfect for more difficult answer types (e.g., job), it still outperforms EM/F1, and we observe no bias issues, such as self-preference, when the same model is used for both the QA and judgment tasks.

Harnessing PDF Data for Improving Japanese Large Multimodal Models

Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) have demonstrated strong performance in English, but their effectiveness in Japanese remains limited due to the lack of high-quality training data. Current Japanese LMMs often rely on translated English datasets, restricting their ability to capture Japan-specific cultural knowledge. To address this, we explore the potential of Japanese PDF data as a training resource, an area that remains largely underutilized. We introduce a fully automated pipeline that leverages pretrained models to extract image-text pairs from PDFs through layout analysis, OCR, and vision-language pairing, removing the need for manual annotation. Additionally, we construct instruction data from extracted image-text pairs to enrich the training data. To evaluate the effectiveness of PDF-derived data, we train Japanese LMMs and assess their performance on the Japanese LMM Benchmark. Our results demonstrate substantial improvements, with performance gains ranging from 3.9% to 13.8% on Heron-Bench. Further analysis highlights the impact of PDF-derived data on various factors, such as model size and language models, reinforcing its value as a multimodal resource for Japanese LMMs. We plan to make the source code and data publicly available upon acceptance.

ParaRev: Building a dataset for Scientific Paragraph Revision annotated with revision instruction

Revision is a crucial step in scientific writing, where authors refine their work to improve clarity, structure, and academic quality. Existing approaches to automated writing assistance often focus on sentence-level revisions, which fail to capture the broader context needed for effective modification. In this paper, we explore the impact of shifting from sentence-level to paragraph-level scope for the task of scientific text revision. The paragraph level definition of the task allows for more meaningful changes, and is guided by detailed revision instructions rather than general ones. To support this task, we introduce ParaRev, the first dataset of revised scientific paragraphs with an evaluation subset manually annotated with revision instructions. Our experiments demonstrate that using detailed instructions significantly improves the quality of automated revisions compared to general approaches, no matter the model or the metric considered.

The Promises and Pitfalls of LLM Annotations in Dataset Labeling: a Case Study on Media Bias Detection

High annotation costs from hiring or crowdsourcing complicate the creation of large, high-quality datasets needed for training reliable text classifiers. Recent research suggests using Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate the annotation process, reducing these costs while maintaining data quality. LLMs have shown promising results in annotating downstream tasks like hate speech detection and political framing. Building on the success in these areas, this study investigates whether LLMs are viable for annotating the complex task of media bias detection and whether a downstream media bias classifier can be trained on such data. We create annolexical, the first large-scale dataset for media bias classification with over 48000 synthetically annotated examples. Our classifier, fine-tuned on this dataset, surpasses all of the annotator LLMs by 5-9 percent in Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) and performs close to or outperforms the model trained on human-labeled data when evaluated on two media bias benchmark datasets (BABE and BASIL). This study demonstrates how our approach significantly reduces the cost of dataset creation in the media bias domain and, by extension, the development of classifiers, while our subsequent behavioral stress-testing reveals some of its current limitations and trade-offs.

Self-Compositional Data Augmentation for Scientific Keyphrase Generation

State-of-the-art models for keyphrase generation require large amounts of training data to achieve good performance. However, obtaining keyphrase-labeled documents can be challenging and costly. To address this issue, we present a self-compositional data augmentation method. More specifically, we measure the relatedness of training documents based on their shared keyphrases, and combine similar documents to generate synthetic samples. The advantage of our method lies in its ability to create additional training samples that keep domain coherence, without relying on external data or resources. Our results on multiple datasets spanning three different domains, demonstrate that our method consistently improves keyphrase generation. A qualitative analysis of the generated keyphrases for the Computer Science domain confirms this improvement towards their representativity property.