Abstract:The rapid advancement of Natural Language Generation (NLG) has made the reliable evaluation of generated text increasingly critical, as these systems, such as large language models (LLMs), are now widely deployed in real-world applications. However, traditional automatic metrics fail to capture the multifaceted nature of perceived quality. In this paper, we introduce TextQ-German, a novel dataset suite for human-centered evaluation of German NLG from a Quality of Experience (QoE) perspective, covering automatic text summarization and machine translation. Through crowdsourcing studies with German speakers, we collect human quality ratings and identify relevant perceptual quality dimensions for each task. We develop automatic QoE prediction models, including transformer-based, linguistic feature-based, and hybrid approaches. Hybrid models outperform pure transformer baselines in almost all experimental settings, while linguistic features alone can approach the performance of fine-tuned language models. The dataset is extended with LLM-generated outputs annotated with overall QoE scores. Final validation on held-out sets indicates generalization to unseen data. Our work contributes a publicly accessible resource for NLG evaluation and baselines for automatic QoE prediction, providing a foundation for developing NLG systems that better align with human quality perception.
Abstract:Electronic health records combine free-text clinical narratives with structured measurements such as vital signs, laboratory values, and comorbidities. Yet most clinical prediction systems still rely on task-specific fusion architectures, pairing dedicated encoders for each modality with learned combination mechanisms that must be re-engineered for every new task and clinical setting. We propose a simpler alternative: convert all patient data, regardless of modality, into a single natural language sequence and fine-tune a pretrained language model end-to-end, with no architectural modification for fusion. We evaluate this approach across three clinically distinct prediction tasks: in-hospital mortality on MIMIC-III, graft failure prediction using longitudinal data from a German transplant center, and emergency triage classification from ambulance records - comparing encoder-based (ModernBERT) and decoder-based (Llama 3.1, Gemma, DeepSeek-R1-Qwen, Qwen3) fine-tuning against established multimodal baselines and, for graft failure, a gradient boosting model currently used in clinical practice for post-transplant patient management. Across all three tasks, unified textual serialization matches or exceeds task-specific multimodal baselines, and outperforms the clinically deployed gradient boosting system on graft failure prediction. These results indicate that a single serialization-based paradigm, without bespoke fusion architectures, is sufficient for multimodal clinical prediction - substantially reducing system complexity while matching or exceeding specialized designs.
Abstract:Conversational data collected in domains such as healthcare or social sciences is a valuable resource for research and automated analysis. However, responsible data sharing requires the detection and removal of personally identifiable and sensitive information to protect individual privacy. To support the development and evaluation of automatic de-identification systems, we present DialogPII, a multilingual dataset of synthetic dialogs and speech-derived transcripts for personal information detection. DialogPII covers eight interaction scenarios (emergency calls, medical anamnesis interviews, therapy sessions, insurance communication, customer support, clinical interviews regarding an AI-supported dashboard, police reports, and group therapy discussions), 19 entity types, and 11 languages (English, Arabic, Finnish, French, German, Hindi, Italian, Polish, Portuguese, Spanish, and Turkish). Dialogs were generated semi-automatically using large language models, manually curated for plausibility and diversity, and localized to country- and city-specific contexts. All dialogs were additionally converted to speech via text-to-speech synthesis, transcribed with Whisper, and annotated through automatic projection and manual correction, yielding aligned written and speech-derived resources across all languages. We further release baseline multilingual named entity recognition models and provide technical validation through inter-annotator agreement analysis, translation quality evaluation, annotation projection assessment, and benchmark experiments with transformer-based sequence labeling models.
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to communicate and explain scientific concepts, yet their tendency to hallucinate poses significant risks in this high stakes use-case. Prior hallucination evaluation work remains largely restricted to the biomedical domain, treats hallucination as a binary task, and has not examined the growing family of scientifically fine-tuned LLMs. We address these gaps with SciFactCheck, a benchmark of 2,500 prompts across five scientific domains, paired with a modular evaluation framework targeting three factuality hallucination types: unverifiability, overclaim, and attribution. Using a controlled minimal-pairing design, we evaluate 18 LLMs by comparing each scientifically fine-tuned model against its general-purpose base. Our results indicate that 1. Scientifically fine-tuned models exhibit degraded factual reliability across all hallucination types and scientific domains, and 2. Fine-tuned models are internally less confident yet linguistically more assertive. A human pilot study further reveals that current fact-checking tools show only modest agreement with expert judgments on scientific content, and that defining scientifically check-worthy claims remains contested even among human annotators. Our findings fundamentally challenge current methods of domain-specific fine-tuning for factuality and call for developing improved verification infrastructure for scientific content.
Abstract:Propaganda detection in social media is challenging due to noisy, short texts and low annotation agreements. We introduce a new intent-focused taxonomy of propaganda techniques and compare it against an established, higher-agreement schema. Along three dimensions (model portfolio, schema effects, and prompting strategy) we evaluate the taxonomies as a classification task with the help of four language models (GPT-4.1-nano, Phi-4 14B, Qwen2.5-14B, Qwen3-14B). Our results show that fine-tuning is essential, since it transforms weak zero-shot baselines into competitive systems and reveals methodological differences that are hidden using base models. Across schemas, the Qwen models achieve the strongest overall performance, and Phi-4 14B consistently outperforms GPT-4.1-nano. Our hierarchical prompting method (HiPP), which predicts fine-grained techniques before aggregating them, is especially beneficial after fine-tuning and on the more ambiguous, low-agreement taxonomy, while remaining competitive on the simpler schema. The HQP dataset, annotated with the new intent-based labels, provides a richer lens on propaganda's strategic goals and a challenging benchmark for future work on robust, real-world detection.
Abstract:Fact-checking articles encode rich supporting evidence and reasoning, yet this evidence remains largely inaccessible to automated verification systems due to unstructured presentation. We introduce PrimeFacts, a methodology and resource for extracting fine-grained evidence from full fact-checking articles. We compile 13,106 PolitiFact articles with claims, verdicts, and all referenced sources, and we identify 49,718 in-article hyperlinks as natural anchors to pinpoint key evidence. Our framework leverages large language models (LLMs) to rewrite these anchor sentences into stand-alone, context-independent premises and investigates the extraction of additional implicit evidence. In evaluations on cross-article evidence retrieval and claim verification, the extracted premises substantially improve performance. Decontextualized evidence yields higher retrievability, achieving up to a 30 percent relative gain in Mean Reciprocal Rank over verbatim sentences, and using the evidence for verdict prediction raises Macro-F1 by 10-20 points over the baseline. These gains are consistent across different verdict granularities (2-class vs. 5-class) and model architectures. A qualitative analysis indicates that the decontextualized premises remain faithful to the original sources. Our work highlights the promise of reusing fact-checkers' evidence for automation and provides a large-scale resource of structured evidence from real-world fact-checks.
Abstract:Accessing sensitive patient data for machine learning is challenging due to privacy concerns. Datasets with annotations of personally identifiable information are crucial for developing and testing anonymization systems to enable safe data sharing that complies with privacy regulations. Since accessing real patient data is a bottleneck, synthetic data offers an efficient solution for data scarcity, bypassing privacy regulations that apply to real data. Moreover, neural machine translation can help to create high-quality data for low-resource languages by translating validated real or synthetic data from a high-resource language. In this work, we create a multilingual anonymization benchmark in ten languages, using a machine translation methodology that preserves the original annotations and renders names of cities and people in a culturally and contextually appropriate form in each target language. Our evaluation study with medical professionals confirms the quality of the translations, both in general and with respect to the translation and adaptation of personal information. Our benchmark with over 2,500 annotations of personal information can be used in many applications, including training annotators, validating annotations across institutions without legal complications, and helping improve the performance of automatic personal information detection. We make our benchmark and annotation guidelines available for further research.
Abstract:Speaker anonymization aims to conceal a speaker's identity, without considering the linguistic content. In this study, we reveal a weakness of Librispeech, the dataset that is commonly used to evaluate anonymizers: the books read by the Librispeech speakers are so distinct, that speakers can be identified by their vocabularies. Even perfect anonymizers cannot prevent this identity leakage. The EdAcc dataset is better in this regard: only a few speakers can be identified through their vocabularies, encouraging the attacker to look elsewhere for the identities of the anonymized speakers. EdAcc also comprises spontaneous speech and more diverse speakers, complementing Librispeech and giving more insights into how anonymizers work.
Abstract:Despite advances in Natural Language Generation (NLG), evaluation remains challenging. Although various new metrics and LLM-as-a-judge (LaaJ) methods are proposed, human judgment persists as the gold standard. To systematically review how NLG evaluation has evolved, we employ an automatic information extraction scheme to gather key information from NLG papers, focusing on different evaluation methods (metrics, LaaJ and human evaluation). With extracted metadata from 14,171 papers across four major conferences (ACL, EMNLP, NAACL, and INLG) over the past six years, we reveal several critical findings: (1) Task Divergence: While Dialogue Generation demonstrates a rapid shift toward LaaJ (>40% in 2025), Machine Translation remains locked into n-gram metrics, and Question Answering exhibits a substantial decline in the proportion of studies conducting human evaluation. (2) Metric Inertia: Despite the development of semantic metrics, general-purpose metrics (e.g., BLEU, ROUGE) continue to be widely used across tasks without empirical justification, often lacking the discriminative power to distinguish between specific quality criteria. (3) Human-LaaJ Divergence: Our association analysis challenges the assumption that LLMs act as mere proxies for humans; LaaJ and human evaluations prioritize very different signals, and explicit validation is scarce (<8% of papers comparing the two), with only moderate to low correlation. Based on these observations, we derive practical recommendations to improve the rigor of future NLG evaluation.
Abstract:Counterfactuals refer to minimally edited inputs that cause a model's prediction to change, serving as a promising approach to explaining the model's behavior. Large language models (LLMs) excel at generating English counterfactuals and demonstrate multilingual proficiency. However, their effectiveness in generating multilingual counterfactuals remains unclear. To this end, we conduct a comprehensive study on multilingual counterfactuals. We first conduct automatic evaluations on both directly generated counterfactuals in the target languages and those derived via English translation across six languages. Although translation-based counterfactuals offer higher validity than their directly generated counterparts, they demand substantially more modifications and still fall short of matching the quality of the original English counterfactuals. Second, we find the patterns of edits applied to high-resource European-language counterfactuals to be remarkably similar, suggesting that cross-lingual perturbations follow common strategic principles. Third, we identify and categorize four main types of errors that consistently appear in the generated counterfactuals across languages. Finally, we reveal that multilingual counterfactual data augmentation (CDA) yields larger model performance improvements than cross-lingual CDA, especially for lower-resource languages. Yet, the imperfections of the generated counterfactuals limit gains in model performance and robustness.