Arianna Muti

CL
h-index47
9papers
245citations
Novelty31%
AI Score41

9 Papers

CLDec 4, 2025
Challenging the Abilities of Large Language Models in Italian: a Community Initiative

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.

CLDec 3, 2025
Generative AI Practices, Literacy, and Divides: An Empirical Analysis in the Italian Context

Beatrice Savoldi, Giuseppe Attanasio, Olga Gorodetskaya et al.

The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) language technologies, particularly generative AI (GenAI) chatbots accessible via conversational interfaces, is transforming digital interactions. While these tools hold societal promise, they also risk widening digital divides due to uneven adoption and low awareness of their limitations. This study presents the first comprehensive empirical mapping of GenAI adoption, usage patterns, and literacy in Italy, based on newly collected survey data from 1,906 Italian-speaking adults. Our findings reveal widespread adoption for both work and personal use, including sensitive tasks like emotional support and medical advice. Crucially, GenAI is supplanting other technologies to become a primary information source: this trend persists despite low user digital literacy, posing a risk as users struggle to recognize errors or misinformation. Moreover, we identify a significant gender divide -- particularly pronounced in older generations -- where women are half as likely to adopt GenAI and use it less frequently than men. While we find literacy to be a key predictor of adoption, it only partially explains this disparity, suggesting that other barriers are at play. Overall, our data provide granular insights into the multipurpose usage of GenAI, highlighting the dual need for targeted educational initiatives and further investigation into the underlying barriers to equitable participation that competence alone cannot explain.

CLSep 4, 2024
Language is Scary when Over-Analyzed: Unpacking Implied Misogynistic Reasoning with Argumentation Theory-Driven Prompts

Arianna Muti, Federico Ruggeri, Khalid Al-Khatib et al.

We propose misogyny detection as an Argumentative Reasoning task and we investigate the capacity of large language models (LLMs) to understand the implicit reasoning used to convey misogyny in both Italian and English. The central aim is to generate the missing reasoning link between a message and the implied meanings encoding the misogyny. Our study uses argumentation theory as a foundation to form a collection of prompts in both zero-shot and few-shot settings. These prompts integrate different techniques, including chain-of-thought reasoning and augmented knowledge. Our findings show that LLMs fall short on reasoning capabilities about misogynistic comments and that they mostly rely on their implicit knowledge derived from internalized common stereotypes about women to generate implied assumptions, rather than on inductive reasoning.

CLNov 11, 2024Code
Untangling Hate Speech Definitions: A Semantic Componential Analysis Across Cultures and Domains

Katerina Korre, Arianna Muti, Federico Ruggeri et al.

Hate speech relies heavily on cultural influences, leading to varying individual interpretations. For that reason, we propose a Semantic Componential Analysis (SCA) framework for a cross-cultural and cross-domain analysis of hate speech definitions. We create the first dataset of hate speech definitions encompassing 493 definitions from more than 100 cultures, drawn from five key domains: online dictionaries, academic research, Wikipedia, legal texts, and online platforms. By decomposing these definitions into semantic components, our analysis reveals significant variation across definitions, yet many domains borrow definitions from one another without taking into account the target culture. We conduct zero-shot model experiments using our proposed dataset, employing three popular open-sourced LLMs to understand the impact of different definitions on hate speech detection. Our findings indicate that LLMs are sensitive to definitions: responses for hate speech detection change according to the complexity of definitions used in the prompt.

CLMar 19, 2025
The CLEF-2025 CheckThat! Lab: Subjectivity, Fact-Checking, Claim Normalization, and Retrieval

Firoj Alam, Julia Maria Struß, Tanmoy Chakraborty et al.

The CheckThat! lab aims to advance the development of innovative technologies designed to identify and counteract online disinformation and manipulation efforts across various languages and platforms. The first five editions focused on key tasks in the information verification pipeline, including check-worthiness, evidence retrieval and pairing, and verification. Since the 2023 edition, the lab has expanded its scope to address auxiliary tasks that support research and decision-making in verification. In the 2025 edition, the lab revisits core verification tasks while also considering auxiliary challenges. Task 1 focuses on the identification of subjectivity (a follow-up from CheckThat! 2024), Task 2 addresses claim normalization, Task 3 targets fact-checking numerical claims, and Task 4 explores scientific web discourse processing. These tasks present challenging classification and retrieval problems at both the document and span levels, including multilingual settings.

CLApr 3, 2024
PejorativITy: Disambiguating Pejorative Epithets to Improve Misogyny Detection in Italian Tweets

Arianna Muti, Federico Ruggeri, Cagri Toraman et al.

Misogyny is often expressed through figurative language. Some neutral words can assume a negative connotation when functioning as pejorative epithets. Disambiguating the meaning of such terms might help the detection of misogyny. In order to address such task, we present PejorativITy, a novel corpus of 1,200 manually annotated Italian tweets for pejorative language at the word level and misogyny at the sentence level. We evaluate the impact of injecting information about disambiguated words into a model targeting misogyny detection. In particular, we explore two different approaches for injection: concatenation of pejorative information and substitution of ambiguous words with univocal terms. Our experimental results, both on our corpus and on two popular benchmarks on Italian tweets, show that both approaches lead to a major classification improvement, indicating that word sense disambiguation is a promising preliminary step for misogyny detection. Furthermore, we investigate LLMs' understanding of pejorative epithets by means of contextual word embeddings analysis and prompting.

CLDec 11, 2025
FIBER: A Multilingual Evaluation Resource for Factual Inference Bias

Evren Ayberk Munis, Deniz Yılmaz, Arianna Muti et al.

Large language models are widely used across domains, yet there are concerns about their factual reliability and biases. Factual knowledge probing offers a systematic means to evaluate these aspects. Most existing benchmarks focus on single-entity facts and monolingual data. We therefore present FIBER, a multilingual benchmark for evaluating factual knowledge in single- and multi-entity settings. The dataset includes sentence completion, question-answering, and object-count prediction tasks in English, Italian, and Turkish. Using FIBER, we examine whether the prompt language induces inference bias in entity selection and how large language models perform on multi-entity versus single-entity questions. The results indicate that the language of the prompt can influence the model's generated output, particularly for entities associated with the country corresponding to that language. However, this effect varies across different topics such that 31% of the topics exhibit factual inference bias score greater than 0.5. Moreover, the level of bias differs across languages such that Turkish prompts show higher bias compared to Italian in 83% of the topics, suggesting a language-dependent pattern. Our findings also show that models face greater difficulty when handling multi-entity questions than the single-entity questions. Model performance differs across both languages and model sizes. The highest mean average precision is achieved in English, while Turkish and Italian lead to noticeably lower scores. Larger models, including Llama-3.1-8B and Qwen-2.5-7B, show consistently better performance than smaller 3B-4B models.

CLJun 20, 2024
Let Guidelines Guide You: A Prescriptive Guideline-Centered Data Annotation Methodology

Federico Ruggeri, Eleonora Misino, Arianna Muti et al.

We introduce the Guideline-Centered Annotation Methodology (GCAM), a novel data annotation methodology designed to report the annotation guidelines associated with each data sample. Our approach addresses three key limitations of the standard prescriptive annotation methodology by reducing the information loss during annotation and ensuring adherence to guidelines. Furthermore, GCAM enables the efficient reuse of annotated data across multiple tasks. We evaluate GCAM in two ways: (i) through a human annotation study and (ii) an experimental evaluation with several machine learning models. Our results highlight the advantages of GCAM from multiple perspectives, demonstrating its potential to improve annotation quality and error analysis.

CLMay 29, 2023
A Corpus for Sentence-level Subjectivity Detection on English News Articles

Francesco Antici, Andrea Galassi, Federico Ruggeri et al.

We develop novel annotation guidelines for sentence-level subjectivity detection, which are not limited to language-specific cues. We use our guidelines to collect NewsSD-ENG, a corpus of 638 objective and 411 subjective sentences extracted from English news articles on controversial topics. Our corpus paves the way for subjectivity detection in English and across other languages without relying on language-specific tools, such as lexicons or machine translation. We evaluate state-of-the-art multilingual transformer-based models on the task in mono-, multi-, and cross-language settings. For this purpose, we re-annotate an existing Italian corpus. We observe that models trained in the multilingual setting achieve the best performance on the task.