Rob Voigt

Qingcheng Zeng, Lucas Garay, Peilin Zhou et al. · cambridge, harvard

Large pre-trained models have revolutionized natural language processing (NLP) research and applications, but high training costs and limited data resources have prevented their benefits from being shared equally amongst speakers of all the world's languages. To address issues of cross-linguistic access to such models and reduce energy consumption for sustainability during large-scale model training, this study proposes an effective and energy-efficient framework called GreenPLM that uses bilingual lexicons to directly "translate" pre-trained language models of one language into another at almost no additional cost. We validate this approach in 18 languages' BERT models and show that this framework is comparable to, if not better than, other heuristics with high training costs. In addition, given lightweight continued pre-training on limited data where available, this framework outperforms the original monolingual language models in six out of seven tested languages with up to 200x less pre-training efforts. Aiming at the Leave No One Behind Principle (LNOB), our approach manages to reduce inequalities between languages and energy consumption greatly. We make our codes and models publicly available here: \url{https://github.com/qcznlp/GreenPLMs}

Mourad Heddaya, Solomon Dworkin, Chenhao Tan et al.

Leveraging an established exercise in negotiation education, we build a novel dataset for studying how the use of language shapes bilateral bargaining. Our dataset extends existing work in two ways: 1) we recruit participants via behavioral labs instead of crowdsourcing platforms and allow participants to negotiate through audio, enabling more naturalistic interactions; 2) we add a control setting where participants negotiate only through alternating, written numeric offers. Despite the two contrasting forms of communication, we find that the average agreed prices of the two treatments are identical. But when subjects can talk, fewer offers are exchanged, negotiations finish faster, the likelihood of reaching agreement rises, and the variance of prices at which subjects agree drops substantially. We further propose a taxonomy of speech acts in negotiation and enrich the dataset with annotated speech acts. Our work also reveals linguistic signals that are predictive of negotiation outcomes.

Suet-Ying Lam, Qingcheng Zeng, Jingyi Wu et al.

Whether large language models (LLMs) process language similarly to humans has been the subject of much theoretical and practical debate. We examine this question through the lens of the production-interpretation distinction found in human sentence processing and evaluate the extent to which instruction-tuned LLMs replicate this distinction. Using an empirically documented asymmetry between pronoun production and interpretation in humans for implicit causality verbs as a testbed, we find that some LLMs do quantitatively and qualitatively reflect human-like asymmetries between production and interpretation. We demonstrate that whether this behavior holds depends upon both model size-with larger models more likely to reflect human-like patterns and the choice of meta-linguistic prompts used to elicit the behavior. Our codes and results are available at https://github.com/LingMechLab/Production-Interpretation_Asymmetries_ACL2025.

Suet-Ying Lam, Qingcheng Zeng, Kexun Zhang et al.

While a large body of literature suggests that large language models (LLMs) acquire rich linguistic representations, little is known about whether they adapt to linguistic biases in a human-like way. The present study probes this question by asking whether LLMs display human-like referential biases using stimuli and procedures from real psycholinguistic experiments. Recent psycholinguistic studies suggest that humans adapt their referential biases with recent exposure to referential patterns; closely replicating three relevant psycholinguistic experiments from Johnson & Arnold (2022) in an in-context learning (ICL) framework, we found that InstructGPT adapts its pronominal interpretations in response to the frequency of referential patterns in the local discourse, though in a limited fashion: adaptation was only observed relative to syntactic but not semantic biases. By contrast, FLAN-UL2 fails to generate meaningful patterns. Our results provide further evidence that contemporary LLMs discourse representations are sensitive to syntactic patterns in the local context but less so to semantic patterns. Our data and code are available at \url{https://github.com/zkx06111/llm_priming}.

Qingcheng Zeng, Weihao Xuan, Leyang Cui et al.

Large reasoning models (LRMs) have recently demonstrated impressive capabilities in complex reasoning tasks by leveraging increased test-time computation and exhibiting behaviors reminiscent of human-like self-reflection. While LRMs show a clear capacity for valuable self-reflection, how this ability interacts with other model behaviors remains underexplored. We investigate this connection by analyzing verbalized confidence, how models articulate their certainty, as a lens into the nature of self-reflection in LRMs. We find that supervised fine-tuning on reasoning traces (i.e., distillation) and reinforcement learning can improve verbalized calibration in reasoning-intensive settings in a progressive, laddered fashion. However, our results also indicate that reasoning models may possess a diminished awareness of their own knowledge boundaries, as evidenced by significantly lower "I don't know" response rates on factuality benchmarks. Moreover, we examine the relationship between verbalized confidence and reasoning chains, finding that models tend to express higher confidence when providing shorter or less elaborate reasoning. Our findings highlight how reasoning-oriented training can enhance performance in reasoning-centric tasks while potentially incurring a "reasoning tax," a cost reflected in the model's reduced ability to accurately recognize the limits of its own knowledge in small-scale models. More broadly, our work showcases how this erosion of knowledge boundaries can compromise model faithfulness, as models grow more confident without a commensurate understanding of when they should abstain.

Qingcheng Zeng, Guanhong Liu, Zhaoqian Xue et al.

On July 13, 2024, at the Trump rally in Pennsylvania, someone attempted to assassinate Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump. This attempt sparked a large-scale discussion on social media. We collected posts from X (formerly known as Twitter) one week before and after the assassination attempt and aimed to model the short-term effects of such a ``shock'' on public opinions and discussion topics. Specifically, our study addresses three key questions: first, we investigate how public sentiment toward Donald Trump shifts over time and across regions (RQ1) and examine whether the assassination attempt itself significantly affects public attitudes, independent of the existing political alignments (RQ2). Finally, we explore the major themes in online conversations before and after the crisis, illustrating how discussion topics evolved in response to this politically charged event (RQ3). By integrating large language model-based sentiment analysis, difference-in-differences modeling, and topic modeling techniques, we find that following the attempt the public response was broadly sympathetic to Trump rather than polarizing, despite baseline ideological and regional disparities.

Grace LeFevre, Qingcheng Zeng, Adam Leif et al.

The social impact of Natural Language Processing (NLP) is increasingly important, with a rising community focus on initiatives related to NLP for Social Good (NLP4SG). Indeed, in recent years, almost 20% of all papers in the ACL Anthology address topics related to social good as defined by the UN Sustainable Development Goals (Adauto et al., 2023). In this study, we take an author- and venue-level perspective to map the landscape of NLP4SG, quantifying the proportion of work addressing social good concerns both within and beyond the ACL community, by both core ACL contributors and non-ACL authors. With this approach we discover two surprising facts about the landscape of NLP4SG. First, ACL authors are dramatically more likely to do work addressing social good concerns when publishing in venues outside of ACL. Second, the vast majority of publications using NLP techniques to address concerns of social good are done by non-ACL authors in venues outside of ACL. We discuss the implications of these findings on agenda-setting considerations for the ACL community related to NLP4SG.

Adam Visokay, Ruth Bagley, Ian Kennedy et al.

Rental listings offer a unique window into how urban space is socially constructed through language. We analyze Chicago Craigslist rental advertisements from 2018 to 2024 to examine how listing agents characterize neighborhoods, identifying mismatches between institutional boundaries and neighborhood claims. Through manual and large language model annotation, we classify unstructured listings from Craigslist according to their neighborhood. Geospatial analysis reveals three distinct patterns: properties with conflicting neighborhood designations due to competing spatial definitions, border properties with valid claims to adjacent neighborhoods, and ``reputation laundering" where listings claim association with distant, desirable neighborhoods. Through topic modeling, we identify patterns that correlate with spatial positioning: listings further from neighborhood centers emphasize different amenities than centrally-located units. Our findings demonstrate that natural language processing techniques can reveal how definitions of urban spaces are contested in ways that traditional methods overlook.

Kefan Yu, Qingcheng Zeng, Weihao Xuan et al.

Current large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated emerging capabilities in social intelligence tasks, including implicature resolution and theory-of-mind reasoning, both of which require substantial pragmatic understanding. However, how LLMs acquire this pragmatic competence throughout the training process remains poorly understood. In this work, we introduce ALTPRAG, a dataset grounded in the pragmatic concept of alternatives, to evaluate whether LLMs at different training stages can accurately infer nuanced speaker intentions. Each instance pairs two equally plausible yet pragmatically divergent continuations and requires the model to (i) infer the speaker's intended meaning and (ii) explain when and why a speaker would choose one utterance over its alternative, thus directly probing pragmatic competence through contrastive reasoning. We systematically evaluate 22 LLMs across 3 key training stages: after pre-training, supervised fine-tuning (SFT), and preference optimization, to examine the development of pragmatic competence. Our results show that even base models exhibit notable sensitivity to pragmatic cues, which improves consistently with increases in model and data scale. Additionally, SFT and RLHF contribute further gains, particularly in cognitive-pragmatic scenarios. These findings highlight pragmatic competence as an emergent and compositional property of LLM training and offer new insights for aligning models with human communicative norms.

Dorottya Demszky, Nikhil Garg, Rob Voigt et al.

We provide an NLP framework to uncover four linguistic dimensions of political polarization in social media: topic choice, framing, affect and illocutionary force. We quantify these aspects with existing lexical methods, and propose clustering of tweet embeddings as a means to identify salient topics for analysis across events; human evaluations show that our approach generates more cohesive topics than traditional LDA-based models. We apply our methods to study 4.4M tweets on 21 mass shootings. We provide evidence that the discussion of these events is highly polarized politically and that this polarization is primarily driven by partisan differences in framing rather than topic choice. We identify framing devices, such as grounding and the contrasting use of the terms "terrorist" and "crazy", that contribute to polarization. Results pertaining to topic choice, affect and illocutionary force suggest that Republicans focus more on the shooter and event-specific facts (news) while Democrats focus more on the victims and call for policy changes. Our work contributes to a deeper understanding of the way group divisions manifest in language and to computational methods for studying them.