arXiv subjects

Ben Yao

Publications and source records attributed to Ben Yao.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2025

Has ACL Lost Its Crown? A Decade-Long Quantitative Analysis of Scale and Impact Across Leading AI Conferences

The recent surge of language models (LMs) has rapidly expanded NLP/AI research, driving an exponential rise in submissions and acceptances at major conferences. Yet this growth has been shadowed by escalating concerns over conference quality, such as plagiarism, reviewer inexperience, and collusive bidding. However, existing studies rely largely on qualitative accounts, for example expert interviews and social media discussions, lacking longitudinal empirical evidence. To fill this gap, we conduct a ten-year empirical study (2014-2024) spanning seven leading conferences. We build a four-dimensional bibliometric framework covering conference scale, core citation statistics, impact dispersion, and cross-venue and journal influence. Notably, we further propose a metric called Quality-Quantity Elasticity (QQE), which measures the elasticity of citation growth relative to acceptance growth. We highlight two key findings. First, conference expansion does not lead to proportional growth in scholarly impact, as QQE consistently declines over time across all venues. Second, ACL has not lost its crown, continuing to outperform other NLP conferences in median citations, milestone contributions, and citation coverage. This study provides the first decade-long, cross-venue empirical evidence on the evolution of major NLP/AI conferences. Our code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/acl-crown-analysis-38D5.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2025

Large Language Models for Subjective Language Understanding: A Survey

Subjective language understanding refers to a broad set of natural language processing tasks where the goal is to interpret or generate content that conveys personal feelings, opinions, or figurative meanings rather than objective facts. With the advent of large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, LLaMA, and others, there has been a paradigm shift in how we approach these inherently nuanced tasks. In this survey, we provide a comprehensive review of recent advances in applying LLMs to subjective language tasks, including sentiment analysis, emotion recognition, sarcasm detection, humor understanding, stance detection, metaphor interpretation, intent detection, and aesthetics assessment. We begin by clarifying the definition of subjective language from linguistic and cognitive perspectives, and we outline the unique challenges posed by subjective language (e.g. ambiguity, figurativeness, context dependence). We then survey the evolution of LLM architectures and techniques that particularly benefit subjectivity tasks, highlighting why LLMs are well-suited to model subtle human-like judgments. For each of the eight tasks, we summarize task definitions, key datasets, state-of-the-art LLM-based methods, and remaining challenges. We provide comparative insights, discussing commonalities and differences among tasks and how multi-task LLM approaches might yield unified models of subjectivity. Finally, we identify open issues such as data limitations, model bias, and ethical considerations, and suggest future research directions. We hope this survey will serve as a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners interested in the intersection of affective computing, figurative language processing, and large-scale language models.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Are MLMs Trapped in the Visual Room?

Can multi-modal large models (MLMs) that can ``see'' an image be said to ``understand'' it? Drawing inspiration from Searle's Chinese Room, we propose the \textbf{Visual Room} argument: a system may process and describe every detail of visual inputs by following algorithmic rules, without genuinely comprehending the underlying intention. This dilemma challenges the prevailing assumption that perceptual mastery implies genuine understanding. In implementation, we introduce a two-tier evaluation framework spanning perception and cognition. The perception component evaluates whether MLMs can accurately capture the surface-level details of visual contents, where the cognitive component examines their ability to infer sarcasm polarity. To support this framework, We further introduce a high-quality multi-modal sarcasm dataset comprising both 924 static images and 100 dynamic videos. All sarcasm labels are annotated by the original authors and verified by independent reviewers to ensure clarity and consistency. We evaluate eight state-of-the-art (SoTA) MLMs. Our results highlight three key findings: (1) MLMs demonstrate high accuracy in visual perception; (2) even with correct perception, MLMs exhibit an average error rate of ~17.1\% in sarcasm understanding, revealing a significant gap between seeing and understanding; (3) this gap stems from weaknesses in context integration, emotional reasoning, and pragmatic inference. This work provides empirical grounding for the proposed Visual Room argument and offers a new evaluation paradigm for MLMs.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2025

NurValues: Real-World Nursing Values Evaluation for Large Language Models in Clinical Context

While LLMs have demonstrated medical knowledge and conversational ability, their deployment in clinical practice raises new risks: patients may place greater trust in LLM-generated responses than in nurses' professional judgments, potentially intensifying nurse-patient conflicts. Such risks highlight the urgent need of evaluating whether LLMs align with the core nursing values upheld by human nurses. This work introduces the first benchmark for nursing value alignment, consisting of five core value dimensions distilled from international nursing codes: Altruism, Human Dignity, Integrity, Justice, and Professionalism. We define two-level tasks on the benchmark, considering the two characteristics of emerging nurse-patient conflicts. The Easy-Level dataset consists of 2,200 value-aligned and value-violating instances, which are collected through a five-month longitudinal field study across three hospitals of varying tiers; The Hard-Level dataset is comprised of 2,200 dialogue-based instances that embed contextual cues and subtle misleading signals, which increase adversarial complexity and better reflect the subjectivity and bias of narrators in the context of emerging nurse-patient conflicts. We evaluate a total of 23 SoTA LLMs on their ability to align with nursing values, and find that general LLMs outperform medical ones, and Justice is the hardest value dimension. As the first real-world benchmark for healthcare value alignment, NurValues provides novel insights into how LLMs navigate ethical challenges in clinician-patient interactions.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Is Sarcasm Detection A Step-by-Step Reasoning Process in Large Language Models?

Elaborating a series of intermediate reasoning steps significantly improves the ability of large language models (LLMs) to solve complex problems, as such steps would evoke LLMs to think sequentially. However, human sarcasm understanding is often considered an intuitive and holistic cognitive process, in which various linguistic, contextual, and emotional cues are integrated to form a comprehensive understanding, in a way that does not necessarily follow a step-by-step fashion. To verify the validity of this argument, we introduce a new prompting framework (called SarcasmCue) containing four sub-methods, viz. chain of contradiction (CoC), graph of cues (GoC), bagging of cues (BoC) and tensor of cues (ToC), which elicits LLMs to detect human sarcasm by considering sequential and non-sequential prompting methods. Through a comprehensive empirical comparison on four benchmarks, we highlight three key findings: (1) CoC and GoC show superior performance with more advanced models like GPT-4 and Claude 3.5, with an improvement of 3.5%. (2) ToC significantly outperforms other methods when smaller LLMs are evaluated, boosting the F1 score by 29.7% over the best baseline. (3) Our proposed framework consistently pushes the state-of-the-art (i.e., ToT) by 4.2%, 2.0%, 29.7%, and 58.2% in F1 scores across four datasets. This demonstrates the effectiveness and stability of the proposed framework.

cs.CL↗