Antonio Serino

Emilio Colombo, Fabio Mercorio, Mario Mezzanzanica et al.

AI and related technologies are reshaping jobs and tasks, either by automating or augmenting human skills in the workplace. Many researchers have been working on estimating if and to what extent jobs and tasks are exposed to the risk of being automatized by AI-related technologies. Our work tackles this issue through a data-driven approach by: (i) developing a reproducible framework that uses cutting-edge open-source large language models to assess the current capabilities of AI and robotics in performing job-related tasks; (ii) formalizing and computing a measure of AI exposure by occupation, the Task Exposure to AI (TEAI) index, and a measure of Task Replacement by AI (TRAI), both validated through a human user evaluation and compared with the state of the art. Our results show that the TEAI index is positively correlated with cognitive, problem-solving and management skills, while it is negatively correlated with social skills. Applying the index to the US, we obtain that about one-third of US employment is highly exposed to AI, primarily in high-skill jobs requiring a graduate or postgraduate level of education. We also find that AI exposure is positively associated with both employment and wage growth in 2003-2023, suggesting that AI has an overall positive effect on productivity. Considering specifically the TRAI index, we find that even in high-skill occupations, AI exhibits high variability in task substitution, suggesting that AI and humans complement each other within the same occupation, while the allocation of tasks within occupations is likely to change. All results, models, and code are freely available online to allow the community to reproduce our results, compare outcomes, and use our work as a benchmark to monitor AI's progress over time.

Malvina Nissim, Danilo Croce, Viviana Patti et al.

The rapid progress of Large Language Models (LLMs) has transformed natural language processing and broadened its impact across research and society. Yet, systematic evaluation of these models, especially for languages beyond English, remains limited. "Challenging the Abilities of LAnguage Models in ITAlian" (CALAMITA) is a large-scale collaborative benchmarking initiative for Italian, coordinated under the Italian Association for Computational Linguistics. Unlike existing efforts that focus on leaderboards, CALAMITA foregrounds methodology: it federates more than 80 contributors from academia, industry, and the public sector to design, document, and evaluate a diverse collection of tasks, covering linguistic competence, commonsense reasoning, factual consistency, fairness, summarization, translation, and code generation. Through this process, we not only assembled a benchmark of over 20 tasks and almost 100 subtasks, but also established a centralized evaluation pipeline that supports heterogeneous datasets and metrics. We report results for four open-weight LLMs, highlighting systematic strengths and weaknesses across abilities, as well as challenges in task-specific evaluation. Beyond quantitative results, CALAMITA exposes methodological lessons: the necessity of fine-grained, task-representative metrics, the importance of harmonized pipelines, and the benefits and limitations of broad community engagement. CALAMITA is conceived as a rolling benchmark, enabling continuous integration of new tasks and models. This makes it both a resource -- the most comprehensive and diverse benchmark for Italian to date -- and a framework for sustainable, community-driven evaluation. We argue that this combination offers a blueprint for other languages and communities seeking inclusive and rigorous LLM evaluation practices.

Fabio Mercorio, Mario Mezzanzanica, Daniele Potertì et al.

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly enhanced their ability to generate and manipulate human language, highlighting their potential across various applications. Evaluating LLMs in languages other than English is crucial for ensuring their linguistic versatility, cultural relevance, and applicability in diverse global contexts, thus broadening their usability and effectiveness. We tackle this challenge by introducing a structured benchmark using the INVALSI tests, a set of well-established assessments designed to measure educational competencies across Italy. Our study makes three primary contributions: Firstly, we adapt the INVALSI benchmark for automated LLM evaluation, which involves rigorous adaptation of the test format to suit automated processing while retaining the essence of the original tests. Secondly, we provide a detailed assessment of current LLMs, offering a crucial reference point for the academic community. Finally, we visually compare the performance of these models against human results. Additionally, researchers are invited to submit their models for ongoing evaluation, ensuring the benchmark remains a current and valuable resource.