SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Vassili Philippov

Publications and source records attributed to Vassili Philippov.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

English Word Sense Disambiguation in 2026: When the Labels Become the Bottleneck

In English all-words word sense disambiguation (WSD), the labels, not the models, have become the bottleneck: frontier LLMs are accurate enough that the errors surviving in the gold standard decide benchmark rankings -- in the test sets we score on and, as we show causally, in the corpus we train on. We release lexEN, a WSD evaluation benchmark built as a conservative, human-adjudicated correction layer over Maru2022's ALL_NEW benchmark (211 labels changed, 56 removed), and SenseBench, an auditable LLM WSD evaluation harness and living leaderboard (57 models, 192 runs). The task is inventory-constrained multiple choice (the model picks from the supplied WordNet senses), so the reported accuracies are a ceiling on what models achieve without that help. On lexEN-v1 the frontier LLMs converge near 95% (best, 95.6%), the top three families are statistically indistinguishable, and accuracy trades off against reasoning effort and cost across a ~2,500x price span. Relabeling SemCor with frontier models and retraining BEM, ESCHER, and ConSeC unchanged lifts them by several F1 points on test sets the relabeling never touched; we release the relabeled corpora and Glite LENS, a 298M bi-encoder trained on the repaired labels -- to our knowledge the strongest reported (83.6 Raganato ALL, 87.4 Maru ALL_NEW) -- serving at ~$0.13 per million items. On hard items, fine-grained WordNet senses are partly ill-posed even for experts (three-reviewer Fleiss kappa=0.537); coarsening raises annotator agreement and model accuracy together across four inventories, placing a top model inside the expert agreement band at coarse granularity (statistically equivalent under three of four) but significantly below it at fine. The binding constraint is now cost.

cs.CL

Glite ARF: Verifier-Driven Research with Parallel LLM Coding Agents

LLM coding agents make it tempting to automate empirical research by delegating experiments to them directly, but naive delegation does not scale to large projects: low-rate instruction lapses compound into broken, irreproducible artefacts. To address this problem, we present Glite ARF, an open-source Python framework for running many LLM coding agents in parallel on a research repository without sacrificing reproducibility or auditability. The framework defines a three-role stack: a human researcher chooses which hypotheses to test, coding agents (Claude Code, Codex CLI) implement individual tasks under a fixed structure, and deterministic Python verifier scripts enforce task isolation, immutability of completed work, a corrections overlay, and a materialised project overview. We call this verifier-driven research: the rules of the research process live in code that fails loudly when violated, not in prose that agents are merely asked to follow. Using Glite ARF, we developed our submission to the BEA 2026 vocabulary-difficulty shared task, placing first in the closed track and second in the open track on all three target languages (Spanish, German, Mandarin) and reducing the official baseline RMSE by 29.9% (closed) and 35.9% (open). The campaign comprised 273 tracked tasks (146 experiment runs) across 129 feature sets, run by up to twelve parallel agents orchestrated from a single laptop - with some model training on rented A100s - at approximately \$450 in LLM API spend (\$498 total third-party cost), and structured per-fold provenance let us catch and strip four target-leaking feature sets, correcting an implausible 0.609 RMSE to 0.802. Across three campaigns in three domains, the framework's structural machinery adds only about 1% of wall-clock time. Framework and a public demo project accompany this paper.

cs.MA