arXiv subjects

Barbara Plank

Publications and source records attributed to Barbara Plank.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2026

EVADE: LLM-Based Explanation Generation and Validation for Error Detection in NLI

High-quality datasets are critical for training and evaluating reliable NLP models. In tasks like natural language inference (NLI), human label variation (HLV) arises when multiple labels are valid for the same instance, making it difficult to separate annotation errors from plausible variation. An earlier framework, VARIERR (Weber-Genzel et al., 2024), asks multiple annotators to explain their label decisions in the first round and flags errors through validity judgments in the second round. However, conducting two rounds of manual annotation is costly and may limit the coverage of plausible labels or explanations. Our study proposes a new framework, EVADE, for generating and validating explanations to detect errors using large language models (LLMs). We perform a comprehensive analysis comparing human- and LLM-detected errors for NLI across distribution comparison, validation overlap, and impact on model fine-tuning. Our experiments demonstrate that LLM validation refines generated explanation distributions to more closely align with human annotations, and that removing LLM-detected errors from training data yields improvements in fine-tuning performance than removing errors identified by human annotators. This highlights the potential to scale error detection, reducing human effort while improving dataset quality under label variation.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Reasoning that Travels: Dissecting How Chain-of-Thought Transfers Across Models

Large reasoning models (LRMs) often generate extensive chain-of-thought (CoT) traces before producing a final answer. As explicit textual artifacts, these traces can be passed to other models to solve the same task, enabling cross-model reasoning transfer. Yet successful transfer alone does not reveal how the provided CoT contributes to another model's answer. We study this question with a controlled provider--receiver framework, where a provider generates a reasoning trace and a receiver solves the same problem from increasingly longer trace prefixes. We compare force-answer, where the receiver answers directly from the prefix, with free-generation, where it may continue reasoning before answering. Across models and benchmarks, full traces often transfer successfully, but prefix trajectories reveal distinct mechanisms. In force-answer mode, AIME transfer is largely driven by explicit answer availability. MMLU-Pro instead reflects a larger role for receiver competence, while ZebraLogic depends on partial structured-answer information rather than complete-answer leakage alone. In free-generation mode, partial CoTs improve performance across benchmarks, indicating that prefixes can guide continued reasoning. Finally, answer agreement among receivers provides a gold-free signal for stopping provider reasoning early. Overall, cross-model CoT transfer is not a single phenomenon: it can reflect answer extraction, reasoning scaffolding, or receiver-dependent competence.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Tracing Uncertainty in Language Model "Reasoning"

Language model (LM) "reasoning", commonly described as Chain-of-Thought or test-time scaling, often improves benchmark performance, but the dynamics underlying this process remain poorly understood. We study these dynamics through the lens of uncertainty quantification by treating the "reasoning" traces, the intermediate token sequences generated by LMs, as evolving model states. We summarize each trace by an uncertainty trace profile: a small set of features describing the shape of the uncertainty signal over its trace, such as its slope and linearity. We find that across five LMs evaluated on GSM8K and ProntoQA, these profiles predict whether a trace yields a correct final answer with AUROC up to 0.807, improving markedly on recent related work. We reach AUROC 0.801 using only the first few hundred tokens of full traces, suggesting that errors can be detected early in the generation. A detailed comparison of correct and incorrect traces further reveals qualitatively distinct uncertainty profiles, with correct traces showing a steeper and less linear decline in uncertainty. Together, the results suggest that our method, grounded in decision-making under uncertainty, provides a principled lens for studying the generative process underlying LM "reasoning".

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

NICE FACT: Diagnosing and Calibrating VLMs in Quantitative Reasoning for Kinematic Physics

The ability to derive precise spatial and physical insights is a cornerstone of vision-language models (VLMs), yet their poor performances in related spatial intelligence tasks such as physical reasoning remain a fundamental barrier. The community critically lacks a scientific analysis revealing whether VLMs faithfully reach answers or plausibly make guesses. This work aims to provide a fundamental understanding of how VLMs perceive the physical world, and utilize physical laws, while assessing the reliability of model confidence. We propose NICE and FACT, a dual-diagnostic paradigm that explicitly decomposes quantitative reasoning for kinematic physics: FACT diagnoses visual fidelity, physical law comprehension, and temporal grounding. NICE studies our novel neighborhood-informed calibration method and novel metrics to evaluate and calibrate confidence reliability. Evaluated across 6 latest state-of-the-art VLMs, we uncover that models fail to identify visual preconditions or utilize necessary physical laws to reach answers. This work highlights and establishes a standardized diagnostic paradigm to guide the development of faithful, physically-grounded VLMs.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2026

Resource-Lean Lexicon Induction for German Dialects

Automatic induction of high-quality dictionaries is essential for building lexical resources, yet low-resource languages and dialects pose several challenges: limited access to annotators, high degree of spelling variations, and poor performance of large language models (LLMs). We empirically show that statistical models (random forests) trained on string similarity features are surprisingly effective for inducing German dialect lexicons. They outperform LLMs, enable cross-dialect transfer, and offer a lightweight data-driven alternative. We evaluate our models intrinsically on bilingual lexicon induction (BLI) and extrinsically on dialect information retrieval (IR). On BLI, random forests outperform Mistral-123b while being more resource-lean. On dialect IR with BM25, using our dialect dictionaries for query expansion yields relative improvements of up to 28.9% in nDCG@10 and 50.7% in Recall@100. Motivated by the resource scarcity in dialects, we further investigate the extent to which models transfer across different German dialects, and their performance under varying amounts of training data.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Survey Response Generation: Generating Closed-Ended Survey Responses In-Silico with Large Language Models

Many in-silico simulations of human survey responses with large language models (LLMs) focus on generating closed-ended survey responses, whereas LLMs are typically trained to generate open-ended text instead. Previous research has used a diverse range of methods for generating closed-ended survey responses with LLMs, and a standard practice remains to be identified. In this paper, we systematically investigate the impact that various Survey Response Generation Methods have on predicted survey responses. We present the results of 32 mio. simulated survey responses across 8 Survey Response Generation Methods, 4 political attitude surveys, and 10 open-weight language models. We find significant differences between the Survey Response Generation Methods in both individual-level and subpopulation-level alignment. Our results show that Restricted Generation Methods perform best overall, and that reasoning output does not consistently improve alignment. Our work underlines the significant impact that Survey Response Generation Methods have on simulated survey responses, and we develop practical recommendations on the application of Survey Response Generation Methods.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

From Noise to Signal to Selbstzweck: Reframing Human Label Variation in the Era of Post-training in NLP

Human Label Variation (HLV) refers to legitimate disagreement in annotation that reflects the diversity of human perspectives rather than mere error. Long treated in NLP as noise to be eliminated, HLV has only recently been reframed as a signal for improving model robustness. With the rise of large language models (LLMs) and post-training methods such as human feedback-based alignment, the role of HLV has become increasingly consequential. Yet current preference-learning datasets routinely collapse multiple annotations into a single label, flattening diverse perspectives into artificial consensus. Preserving HLV is necessary not only for pluralistic alignment but also for sociotechnical safety evaluation, where model behavior must be assessed in relation to human interaction and societal context. This position paper argues that preserving HLV as an embodiment of human pluralism must be treated as a Selbstzweck, an intrinsic value in itself. We analyze the limitations of existing preference datasets and propose actionable strategies for incorporating HLV into dataset construction to better preserve pluralistic human values.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Agree, Disagree, Explain: Decomposing Human Label Variation in NLI through the Lens of Explanations

Natural Language Inference (NLI) datasets often exhibit human label variation. To better understand these variations, explanation-based approaches analyze the underlying reasoning behind annotators' decisions. One such approach is the LiTEx taxonomy, which categorizes free-text explanations in English into reasoning categories. However, previous work applying LiTEx has focused on within-label variation: cases where annotators agree on the NLI label but provide different explanations. This paper broadens the scope by examining how annotators may diverge not only in the reasoning category but also in the labeling. We use explanations as a lens to analyze variation in NLI annotations and to examine individual differences in reasoning. We apply LiTEx to two NLI datasets and align annotation variation from multiple aspects: NLI label agreement, explanation similarity, and taxonomy agreement, with an additional compounding factor of annotators' selection bias. We observe instances where annotators disagree on the label but provide similar explanations, suggesting that surface-level disagreement may mask underlying agreement in interpretation. Moreover, our analysis reveals individual preferences in explanation strategies and label choices. These findings highlight that agreement in reasoning categories better reflects the semantic similarity of explanations than label agreement alone. Our findings underscore the richness of reasoning-based explanations and the need for caution in treating labels as ground truth.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Decoupling the Effect of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning: A Human Label Variation Perspective

Reasoning-tuned LLMs utilizing long Chain-of-Thought (CoT) excel at single-answer tasks, yet their ability to model Human Label Variation--which requires capturing probabilistic ambiguity rather than resolving it--remains underexplored. We investigate this through systematic disentanglement experiments on distribution-based tasks, employing Cross-CoT experiments to isolate the effect of reasoning text from intrinsic model priors. We observe a distinct "decoupled mechanism": while CoT improves distributional alignment, final accuracy is dictated by CoT content (99% variance contribution), whereas distributional ranking is governed by model priors (over 80%). Step-wise analysis further shows that while CoT's influence on accuracy grows monotonically during the reasoning process, distributional structure is largely determined by LLM's intrinsic priors. These findings suggest that long CoT serves as a decisive LLM decision-maker for the top option but fails to function as a granular distribution calibrator for ambiguous tasks.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

ltzGLUE: Luxembourgish General Language Understanding Evaluation

This paper presents ltzGLUE, the first Natural Language Understanding (NLU) benchmark for Luxembourgish (LTZ) based on the popular GLUE benchmark for English. Although NLU tasks are available for many European languages nowadays, LTZ is one of the official national languages that is often overlooked. We construct new tasks and reuse existing ones to introduce the first official NLU benchmark and accompanying evaluation of encoder models for the language. Our tasks include common natural language processing tasks in binary and multi-class classification settings, including named entity recognition, topic classification, and intent classification. We evaluate various pre-trained language models for LTZ to present an overview of the current capabilities of these models on the LTZ language.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Standard-to-Dialect Transfer Trends Differ across Text and Speech: A Case Study on Intent and Topic Classification in German Dialects

Research on cross-dialectal transfer from a standard to a non-standard dialect variety has typically focused on text data. However, dialects are primarily spoken, and non-standard spellings cause issues in text processing. We compare standard-to-dialect transfer in three settings: text models, speech models, and cascaded systems where speech first gets automatically transcribed and then further processed by a text model. We focus on German dialects in the context of written and spoken intent classification -- releasing the first dialectal audio intent classification dataset -- with supporting experiments on topic classification. The speech-only setup provides the best results on the dialect data while the text-only setup works best on the standard data. While the cascaded systems lag behind the text-only models for German, they perform relatively well on the dialectal data if the transcription system generates normalized, standard-like output.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Languages in Whisper-Style Speech Encoders Align Both Phonetically and Semantically

Cross-lingual alignment in pretrained language models enables knowledge transfer across languages. Similar alignment has been reported in Whisper-style speech encoders, based on spoken translation retrieval using representational similarity. However, prior work does not control for phonetic overlap between equivalent utterances, which may artificially support retrieval. We conduct pronunciation-controlled experiments to test whether cross-lingual alignment arises from semantic rather than phonetic similarity. Results show that spoken translation retrieval remains strongly above chance without phonetic cues in the final layers of encoders trained with a speech translation objective, most clearly for models additionally trained on translation. We further test early-exiting the encoder to induce representations we hypothesize to be less tied to language-specific semantics. These experiments indeed reveal performance gains in automatic speech recognition on low-resource languages unseen during training.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Variation is the Norm: Embracing Sociolinguistics in NLP

In Natural Language Processing (NLP), variation is typically seen as noise and "normalised away" before processing, even though it is an integral part of language. Conversely, studying language variation in social contexts is central to sociolinguistics. We present a framework to combine the sociolinguistic dimension of language with the technical dimension of NLP. We argue that by embracing sociolinguistics, variation can actively be included in a research setup, in turn informing the NLP side. To illustrate this, we provide a case study on Luxembourgish, an evolving language featuring a large amount of orthographic variation, demonstrating how NLP performance is impacted. The results show large discrepancies in the performance of models tested and fine-tuned on data with a large amount of orthographic variation in comparison to data closer to the (orthographic) standard. Furthermore, we provide a possible solution to improve the performance by including variation in the fine-tuning process. This case study highlights the importance of including variation in the research setup, as models are currently not robust to occurring variation. Our framework facilitates the inclusion of variation in the thought-process while also being grounded in the theoretical framework of sociolinguistics.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

I Came, I Saw, I Explained: Benchmarking Multimodal LLMs on Figurative Meaning in Memes

Internet memes represent a popular form of multimodal online communication and often use figurative elements to convey layered meaning through the combination of text and images. However, it remains largely unclear how multimodal large language models (MLLMs) combine and interpret visual and textual information to identify figurative meaning in memes. To address this gap, we evaluate eight state-of-the-art generative MLLMs across three datasets on their ability to detect and explain six types of figurative meaning. In addition, we conduct a human evaluation of the explanations generated by these MLLMs, assessing whether the provided reasoning supports the predicted label and whether it remains faithful to the original meme content. Our findings indicate that all models exhibit a strong bias to associate a meme with figurative meaning, even when no such meaning is present. Qualitative analysis further shows that correct predictions are not always accompanied by faithful explanations.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Rashid: A Cipher-Based Framework for Exploring In-Context Language Learning

Where there is growing interest in in-context language learning (ICLL) for unseen languages with large language models, such languages usually suffer from the lack of NLP tools, data resources, and researcher expertise. This means that progress is difficult to assess, the field does not allow for cheap large-scale experimentation, and findings on ICLL are often limited to very few languages and tasks. In light of such limitations, we introduce a framework (Rashid), for studying ICLL wherein we reversibly cipher high-resource languages (HRLs) to construct truly unseen languages with access to a wide range of resources available for HRLs, unlocking previously impossible exploration of ICLL phenomena. We use our framework to assess current methods in the field with SOTA evaluation tools and manual analysis, explore the utility of potentially expensive resources in improving ICLL, and test ICLL strategies on rich downstream tasks beyond machine translation. These lines of exploration showcase the possibilities enabled by our framework, as well as providing actionable insights regarding current performance and future directions in ICLL.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

If Probable, Then Acceptable? Understanding Conditional Acceptability Judgments in Large Language Models

Conditional acceptability refers to how plausible a conditional statement is perceived to be. It plays an important role in communication and reasoning, as it influences how individuals interpret implications, assess arguments, and make decisions based on hypothetical scenarios. When humans evaluate how acceptable a conditional "If A, then B" is, their judgments are influenced by two main factors: the $\textit{conditional probability}$ of $B$ given $A$, and the $\textit{semantic relevance}$ of the antecedent $A$ given the consequent $B$ (i.e., whether $A$ meaningfully supports $B$). While prior work has examined how large language models (LLMs) draw inferences about conditional statements, it remains unclear how these models judge the $\textit{acceptability}$ of such statements. To address this gap, we present a comprehensive study of LLMs' conditional acceptability judgments across different model families, sizes, and prompting strategies. Using linear mixed-effects models and ANOVA tests, we find that models are sensitive to both conditional probability and semantic relevance$\unicode{x2014}$though to varying degrees depending on architecture and prompting style. A comparison with human data reveals that while LLMs incorporate probabilistic and semantic cues, they do so less consistently than humans. Notably, larger models do not necessarily align more closely with human judgments.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Too Open for Opinion? Embracing Open-Endedness in Large Language Models for Social Simulation

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to simulate public opinion and other social phenomena. Most current studies constrain these simulations to multiple-choice or short-answer formats for ease of scoring and comparison, but such closed designs overlook the inherently generative nature of LLMs. In this position paper, we argue that open-endedness, using free-form text that captures topics, viewpoints, and reasoning processes "in" LLMs, is essential for realistic social simulation. Drawing on decades of survey-methodology research and recent advances in NLP, we argue why this open-endedness is valuable in LLM social simulations, showing how it can improve measurement and design, support exploration of unanticipated views, and reduce researcher-imposed directive bias. It also captures expressiveness and individuality, aids in pretesting, and ultimately enhances methodological utility. We call for novel practices and evaluation frameworks that leverage rather than constrain the open-ended generative diversity of LLMs, creating synergies between NLP and social science.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Information Asymmetry across Language Varieties: A Case Study on Cantonese-Mandarin and Bavarian-German QA

Large Language Models (LLMs) are becoming a common way for humans to seek knowledge, yet their coverage and reliability vary widely. Especially for local language varieties, there are large asymmetries, e.g., information in local Wikipedia that is absent from the standard variant. However, little is known about how well LLMs perform under such information asymmetry, especially on closely related languages. We manually construct a novel challenge question-answering (QA) dataset that captures knowledge conveyed on a local Wikipedia page, which is absent from their higher-resource counterparts-covering Mandarin Chinese vs. Cantonese and German vs. Bavarian. Our experiments show that LLMs fail to answer questions about information only in local editions of Wikipedia. Providing context from lead sections substantially improves performance, with further gains possible via translation. Our topical, geographic annotations, and stratified evaluations reveal the usefulness of local Wikipedia editions as sources of both regional and global information. These findings raise critical questions about inclusivity and cultural coverage of LLMs.

cs.CL↗