Aniket Pramanick

Aniket Pramanick, Yufang Hou, Saif M. Mohammad et al.

Natural Language Processing (NLP) is an established and dynamic field. Despite this, what constitutes NLP research remains debated. In this work, we address the question by quantitatively examining NLP research papers. We propose a taxonomy of research contributions and introduce NLPContributions, a dataset of nearly $2k$ NLP research paper abstracts, carefully annotated to identify scientific contributions and classify their types according to this taxonomy. We also introduce a novel task of automatically identifying contribution statements and classifying their types from research papers. We present experimental results for this task and apply our model to $\sim$$29k$ NLP research papers to analyze their contributions, aiding in the understanding of the nature of NLP research. We show that NLP research has taken a winding path -- with the focus on language and human-centric studies being prominent in the 1970s and 80s, tapering off in the 1990s and 2000s, and starting to rise again since the late 2010s. Alongside this revival, we observe a steady rise in dataset and methodological contributions since the 1990s, such that today, on average, individual NLP papers contribute in more ways than ever before. Our dataset and analyses offer a powerful lens for tracing research trends and offer potential for generating informed, data-driven literature surveys.

Aniket Pramanick, Yufang Hou, Saif M. Mohammad et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have ushered in a transformative era in Natural Language Processing (NLP), reshaping research and extending NLP's influence to other fields of study. However, there is little to no work examining the degree to which LLMs influence other research fields. This work empirically and systematically examines the influence and use of LLMs in fields beyond NLP. We curate $106$ LLMs and analyze $\sim$$148k$ papers citing LLMs to quantify their influence and reveal trends in their usage patterns. Our analysis reveals not only the increasing prevalence of LLMs in non-CS fields but also the disparities in their usage, with some fields utilizing them more frequently than others since 2018, notably Linguistics and Engineering together accounting for $\sim$$45\%$ of LLM citations. Our findings further indicate that most of these fields predominantly employ task-agnostic LLMs, proficient in zero or few-shot learning without requiring further fine-tuning, to address their domain-specific problems. This study sheds light on the cross-disciplinary impact of NLP through LLMs, providing a better understanding of the opportunities and challenges.

Aniket Pramanick, Yufang Hou, Saif M. Mohammad et al.

Scientific papers do more than report results $-$ they advance $\textit{claims}$ that later work supports, extends, or sometimes refutes. Yet existing methods for citation and claim analysis capture only fragments of this dialogue. In this work, we make these interactions explicit at the level of individual scientific claims. We introduce $\texttt{ClaimFlow}$, a claim-centric view of the NLP literature, built from $304$ ACL Anthology papers (1979$-$2025) that are manually annotated with $1{,}084$ claims and $832$ cross-paper claim relations, indicating whether a citing paper $\textit{supports}$, $\textit{extends}$, $\textit{qualifies}$, $\textit{refutes}$, or references a claim as $\textit{background}$. Using $\texttt{ClaimFlow}$, we define a new task $-$ $\textit{Claim Relation Classification}$ $-$ which requires models to infer the scientific stance toward a cited claim from the text and citation context. Evaluating strong neural models and large language models on this task, we report baseline performance of $0.78$ macro-F1, highlighting that claim-relation classification is feasible but challenging. We further apply our model to $\sim$$13k$ NLP papers to analyze how claims evolve across decades of NLP research. Our analysis reveals that $63.5$% claims are never reused; only $11.1$% are ever challenged; meanwhile, widely propagated claims are more often $\textit{reshaped}$ through qualification and extension than directly confirmed or refuted. Overall, $\texttt{ClaimFlow}$ offers a lens for examining how ideas shift and mature within NLP, and a foundation for assessing whether models can interpret scientific argumentation.

Emilio Villa-Cueva, Sholpan Bolatzhanova, Diana Turmakhan et al.

Translating cultural content poses challenges for machine translation systems due to the differences in conceptualizations between cultures, where language alone may fail to convey sufficient context to capture region-specific meanings. In this work, we investigate whether images can act as cultural context in multimodal translation. We introduce CaMMT, a human-curated benchmark of over 5,800 triples of images along with parallel captions in English and regional languages. Using this dataset, we evaluate five Vision Language Models (VLMs) in text-only and text+image settings. Through automatic and human evaluations, we find that visual context generally improves translation quality, especially in handling Culturally-Specific Items (CSIs), disambiguation, and correct gender marking. By releasing CaMMT, our objective is to support broader efforts to build and evaluate multimodal translation systems that are better aligned with cultural nuance and regional variations.

Aniket Pramanick, Yufang Hou, Saif M. Mohammad et al.

Understanding the fundamental concepts and trends in a scientific field is crucial for keeping abreast of its continuous advancement. In this study, we propose a systematic framework for analyzing the evolution of research topics in a scientific field using causal discovery and inference techniques. We define three variables to encompass diverse facets of the evolution of research topics within NLP and utilize a causal discovery algorithm to unveil the causal connections among these variables using observational data. Subsequently, we leverage this structure to measure the intensity of these relationships. By conducting extensive experiments on the ACL Anthology corpus, we demonstrate that our framework effectively uncovers evolutionary trends and the underlying causes for a wide range of NLP research topics. Specifically, we show that tasks and methods are primary drivers of research in NLP, with datasets following, while metrics have minimal impact.

Aniket Pramanick, Tilman Beck, Kevin Stowe et al.

Language use changes over time, and this impacts the effectiveness of NLP systems. This phenomenon is even more prevalent in social media data during crisis events where meaning and frequency of word usage may change over the course of days. Contextual language models fail to adapt temporally, emphasizing the need for temporal adaptation in models which need to be deployed over an extended period of time. While existing approaches consider data spanning large periods of time (from years to decades), shorter time spans are critical for crisis data. We quantify temporal degradation for this scenario and propose methods to cope with performance loss by leveraging techniques from domain adaptation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first effort to explore effects of rapid language change driven by adversarial adaptations, particularly during natural and human-induced disasters. Through extensive experimentation on diverse crisis datasets, we analyze under what conditions our approaches outperform strong baselines while highlighting the current limitations of temporal adaptation methods in scenarios where access to unlabeled data is scarce.