Emotions play important epistemological and cognitive roles in our lives, revealing our values and guiding our actions. Previous work has shown that LLMs display biases in emotion attribution along gender lines. However, unlike gender, which says little about our values, religion, as a socio-cultural system, prescribes a set of beliefs and values for its followers. Religions, therefore, cultivate certain emotions. Moreover, these rules are explicitly laid out and interpreted by religious leaders. 
Using emotion attribution, we explore how different religions are represented in LLMs. We find that:
Major religions in the US and European countries are represented with more nuance, displaying a more shaded model of their beliefs.
Eastern religions like Hinduism and Buddhism are strongly stereotyped.
Judaism and Islam are stigmatized -- the models' refusal skyrocket. 
We ascribe these to cultural bias in LLMs and the scarcity of NLP literature on religion. In the rare instances where religion is discussed, it is often in the context of toxic language, perpetuating the perception of these religions as inherently toxic. 
This finding underscores the urgent need to address and rectify these biases. 
Our research emphasizes the crucial role emotions play in shaping our lives and how our values influence them.

Divine LLaMAs: Bias, Stereotypes, Stigmatization, and Emotion Representation of Religion in Large Language Models

Current automatic speech recognition (ASR) models are designed to be used across many languages and tasks without substantial changes. However, this broad language coverage hides performance gaps within languages, for example, across genders. Our study systematically evaluates the performance of two widely used multilingual ASR models on three datasets, encompassing 19 languages from eight language families and two speaking conditions. Our findings reveal clear gender disparities, with the advantaged group varying across languages and models. Surprisingly, those gaps are not explained by acoustic or lexical properties. However, probing internal model states reveals a correlation with gendered performance gap. That is, the easier it is to distinguish speaker gender in a language using probes, the more the gap reduces, favoring female speakers. Our results show that gender disparities persist even in state-of-the-art models. Our findings have implications for the improvement of multilingual ASR systems, underscoring the importance of accessibility to training data and nuanced evaluation to predict and mitigate gender gaps. We release all code and artifacts at https://github.com/g8a9/multilingual-asr-gender-gap.

Twists, Humps, and Pebbles: Multilingual Speech Recognition Models Exhibit Gender Performance Gaps

Pre-trained language models consider the context of neighboring words and documents but lack any author context of the human generating the text. However, language depends on the author’s states, traits, social, situational, and environmental attributes, collectively referred to as human context (Soni et al., 2024). Human-centered natural language processing requires incorporating human context into language models. Currently, two methods exist: pre-training with 1) group-wise attributes (e.g., over-45-year-olds) or 2) individual traits. Group attributes are simple but coarse — not all 45-year-olds write the same way — while individual traits allow for more personalized representations, but require more complex modeling and data. It is unclear which approach benefits what tasks. We compare pre-training models with human context via 1) group attributes, 2) individual users, and 3) a combined approach on five user- and document-level tasks. Our results show that there is no best approach, but that human-centered language modeling holds avenues for different methods.

Comparing Pre-trained Human Language Models: Is it Better with Human Context as Groups, Individual Traits, or Both?

The open-ended nature of language generation makes the evaluation of autoregressive large language models (LLMs) challenging. One common evaluation approach uses multiple-choice questions (MCQ) to limit the response space. The model is then evaluated by ranking the candidate answers by the log probability of the first token prediction. However, first-tokens may not consistently reflect the final response output, due to model's diverse response styles such as starting with "Sure" or refusing to answer. Consequently, MCQ evaluation is not indicative of model behaviour when interacting with users. But by how much? We evaluate how aligned first-token evaluation is with the text output along several dimensions, namely final option choice, refusal rate, choice distribution and robustness under prompt perturbation. Our results show that the two approaches are severely misaligned on all dimensions, reaching mismatch rates over 60%. Models heavily fine-tuned on conversational or safety data are especially impacted. Crucially, models remain misaligned even when we increasingly constrain prompts, i.e., force them to start with an option letter or example template. Our findings i) underscore the importance of inspecting the text output as well and ii) caution against relying solely on first-token evaluation.

My Answer is C: First-Token Probabilities Do Not Match Text Answers in Instruction-Tuned Language Models

The open-ended nature of language generation makes the evaluation of autoregressive large language models (LLMs) challenging. One common evaluation approach uses multiple-choice questions to limit the response space. The model is then evaluated by ranking the candidate answers by the log probability of the first token prediction. However, first-tokens may not consistently reflect the final response output, due to model's diverse response styles such as starting with "Sure" or refusing to answer. Consequently, first-token evaluation is not indicative of model behaviour when interacting with users. But by how much? We evaluate how aligned first-token evaluation is with the text output along several dimensions, namely final option choice, refusal rate, choice distribution and robustness under prompt perturbation. Our results show that the two approaches are severely misaligned \emph{on all dimensions}, reaching mismatch rates over 60\%. Models heavily fine-tuned on conversational or safety data are especially impacted. Crucially, models remain misaligned even when we increasingly constrain prompts, i.e., force them to start with an option letter or example template. Our findings i) underscore the importance of inspecting the text output as well and ii) caution against relying solely on first-token evaluation.

"My Answer is C": First-Token Probabilities Do Not Match Text Answers in Instruction-Tuned Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) reflect societal norms and biases, especially about gender. While societal biases and stereotypes have been extensively researched in various NLP applications, there is a surprising gap for emotion analysis. However, emotion and gender are closely linked in societal discourse. E.g., women are often thought of as more empathetic, while men’s anger is more socially accepted. To fill this gap, we present the first comprehensive study of gendered emotion attribution in five state-of-the-art LLMs (open- and closed-source). We investigate whether emotions are gendered, and whether these variations are based on societal stereotypes. We prompt the models to adopt a gendered persona and attribute emotions to an event like ‘When I had a serious argument with a dear person’. We then analyze the emotions generated by the models in relation to the gender-event pairs. We find that all models consistently exhibit gendered emotions, influenced by gender stereotypes. These findings are in line with established research in psychology and gender studies. Our study sheds light on the complex societal interplay between language, gender, and emotion. The reproduction of emotion stereotypes in LLMs allows us to use those models to study the topic in detail, but raises questions about the predictive use of those same LLMs for emotion applications.

Angry Men, Sad Women: Large Language Models Reflect Gendered Stereotypes in Emotion Attribution

The field of sociolinguistics has studied factors affecting language use for the last century. Labov (1964) and Bernstein (1960) showed that socioeconomic class strongly influences our accents, syntax and lexicon. However, despite growing concerns surrounding fairness and bias in Natural Language Processing (NLP), there is a dearth of studies delving into the effects it may have on NLP systems. We show empirically that NLP systems’ performance is affected by speakers’ SES, potentially disadvantaging less-privileged socioeconomic groups. We annotate a corpus of 95K utterances from movies with social class, ethnicity and geographical language variety and measure the performance of NLP systems on three tasks: language modelling, automatic speech recognition, and grammar error correction. We find significant performance disparities that can be attributed to socioeconomic status as well as ethnicity and geographical differences. With NLP technologies becoming ever more ubiquitous and quotidian, they must accommodate all language varieties to avoid disadvantaging already marginalised groups. We argue for the inclusion of socioeconomic class in future language technologies.

Classist Tools: Social Class Correlates with Performance in NLP

Any report frames issues to favor a particular interpretation by highlighting or excluding certain aspects of a story. Despite the widespread use of framing in disinformation, framing properties and detection methods remain underexplored outside the English-speaking world. We explore how multilingual framing of the same issue differs systematically. We use eight years of Russia-backed disinformation campaigns, spanning 8k news articles in 4 languages targeting 15 countries. We find that disinformation campaigns consistently and intentionally favor specific framing, depending on the target language of the audience. We further discover how Russian-language articles consistently highlight selected frames depending on the region of the media coverage. We find that the two most prominent models for automatic frame analysis underperform and show high disagreement, highlighting the need for further research.

Narratives at Conflict: Computational Analysis of News Framing in Multilingual Disinformation Campaigns

As diverse linguistic communities and users adopt Large Language Models (LLMs), assessing their safety across languages becomes critical. Despite ongoing efforts to align these models with safe and ethical guidelines, they can still be induced into unsafe behavior with jailbreaking, a technique in which models are prompted to act outside their operational guidelines. What research has been conducted on these vulnerabilities was predominantly on English, limiting the understanding of LLM behavior in other languages. We address this gap by investigating Many-Shot Jailbreaking (MSJ) in Italian, underscoring the importance of understanding LLM behavior in different languages. We base our analysis on a newly created Italian dataset to identify unique safety vulnerabilities in 4 families of open-source LLMs. We find that the models exhibit unsafe behaviors even with minimal exposure to harmful prompts, and--more alarmingly--this tendency rapidly escalates with more demonstrations.

Compromesso! Italian Many-Shot Jailbreaks undermine the safety of Large Language Models

Without proper safeguards, large language models will readily follow malicious instructions and generate toxic content. This risk motivates safety efforts such as red-teaming and large-scale feedback learning, which aim to make models both helpful and harmless. However, there is a tension between these two objectives, since harmlessness requires models to refuse to comply with unsafe prompts, and thus not be helpful. Recent anecdotal evidence suggests that some models may have struck a poor balance, so that even clearly safe prompts are refused if they use similar language to unsafe prompts or mention sensitive topics. In this paper, we introduce a new test suite called XSTest to identify such eXaggerated Safety behaviours in a systematic way. XSTest comprises 250 safe prompts across ten prompt types that well-calibrated models should not refuse to comply with, and 200 unsafe prompts as contrasts that models, for most applications, should refuse. We describe XSTest's creation and composition, and then use the test suite to highlight systematic failure modes in state-of-the-art language models as well as more general challenges in building safer language models.

XSTest: A Test Suite for Identifying Exaggerated Safety Behaviours in Large Language Models

Predictive models make mistakes and have biases. To combat both, we need to understand their predictions.
Explainable AI (XAI) provides insights into models for vision, language, and tabular data. However, only a few approaches exist for speech classification models. Previous works focus on a selection of spoken language understanding (SLU) tasks, and most users find their explanations challenging to interpret.
We propose a novel approach to explain speech classification models. It provides two types of insights. (i) Word-level. We measure the impact of each audio segment aligned with a word on the outcome. (ii) Paralinguistic. We evaluate how non-linguistic features (e.g., prosody and background noise) affect the outcome if perturbed.
We validate our approach by explaining two state-of-the-art SLU models on two tasks in English and Italian. We test their plausibility with human subject ratings. Our results show that the explanations correctly represent the model's inner workings and are plausible to humans.

Explaining Speech Classification Models via Word-Level Audio Segments and Paralinguistic Features

We present the system proposed by the MilaNLP team for the Explainable Detection of Online Sexism (EDOS) shared task.
We propose an ensemble modeling approach to combine different classifiers trained with domain adaptation objectives and standard fine-tuning.
Our results show that the ensemble is more robust than individual models and that regularized models generate more ``conservative'' predictions, mitigating the effects of lexical overfitting.
However, our error analysis also finds that many of the misclassified instances are debatable, raising questions about the objective annotatability of hate speech data.

MilaNLP at SemEval-2023 Task 10: Ensembling Domain-Adapted and Regularized Pretrained Language Models for Robust Sexism Detection

Hate speech detection faces two significant challenges: 1) the limited availability of labeled data and 2) the high variability of hate speech across different contexts and languages. Prompting brings a ray of hope to these challenges. It allows injecting a model with task-specific knowledge without relying on labeled data. 
This paper explores zero-shot learning with prompting for hate speech detection. We investigate how well zero-shot learning can detect hate speech in 3 languages with limited labeled data. We experiment with various large language models and verbalizers on 8 benchmark datasets. Our findings highlight the impact of prompt selection on the results. They also suggest that prompting, specifically with recent large language models, can achieve performance comparable to and surpass fine-tuned models, making it a promising alternative for under-resourced languages. 
Our findings highlight the potential of prompting for hate speech detection and show how both the prompt and the model have a significant impact on achieving more accurate predictions in this task.

Respectful or Toxic? Using Zero-Shot Learning with Language Models to Detect Hate Speech

The State of Profanity Obfuscation in Natural Language Processing Scientific Publications

Much work in natural language processing (NLP) relies on human annotation. The majority of this implicitly assumes that annotator’s labels are temporally stable, although the reality is that human judgements are rarely con-
sistent over time. 

As a subjective annotation task, hate speech labels depend on annotator’s emotional and moral reactions to the language used to convey the message. Studies in Cognitive Science reveal a ‘foreign language effect’, whereby people take differing moral positions and perceive offensive phrases to be weaker in their second languages. Does this affect annotations as well?

We conduct an experiment to investigate the impacts of (1) time and (2) different language conditions (English and German) on measurements of intra-annotator agreement in a hate speech labelling task. While we do not observe the expected lower stability in the different language condition, we find that overall agreement
is significantly lower than is implicitly assumed in annotation tasks, which has important implications for dataset reproducibility in NLP

Temporal and Second Language Influence on Intra-Annotator Agreement and Stability in Hate Speech Labelling

Work on hate speech has made considering rude and harmful examples in scientific publications inevitable. This situation raises various problems, such as whether or not to obscure profanities. While science must accurately disclose what it does, the unwarranted spread of hate speech can harm readers and increases its internet frequency. While maintaining publications' professional appearance, obfuscating profanities makes it challenging to evaluate the content, especially for non-native speakers.Surveying 150 ACL papers, we discovered that obfuscation is usually used for English but not other languages, and even then, quite unevenly.We discuss the problems with obfuscation and suggest a multilingual community resource called PrOf with a Python module to standardize profanity obfuscation processes. We believe PrOf can help scientific publication policies to make hate speech work accessible and comparable, irrespective of language.

<iframe src="https://app.sli.do/event/jQes3hFZo3TYjGXEHm6w95/embed/polls/3db251ed-612e-43b7-a663-a6ea2de353cc" width="300" height="400"></iframe>

This poster session includes Main Conference posters and Findings from the following areas:

Computational Social Science and Cultural Analytics • Multimodality and Language Grounding to Vision, Robotics and Beyond  

In-Person Poster Session G (Jasmine)

poster

## Welcome to EMNLP 2024! 
We are excited to welcome you to one of the most prominent conferences in the field of Natural Language Processing. This year, EMNLP 2024 is being held in a hybrid format,
offering both virtual and in-person participation in beautiful Miami. Due to a record-breaking number of submissions, we've expanded the total number of accepted papers to accommodate more cutting-edge research from around the globe.
### [Conference Handbook](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WPROgxjLAC96AJL7Ugy0tEnYm7dkrbHt/view?usp=sharing)

You are required to register for this event. **Please register [here](https://2024.emnlp.org/registration/).** The EMNLP 2024 event page on Underline will be open to public one week prior to the event.

Please register!

EMNLP 2024

EMNLP 2024 will take place in Miami, Florida from Nov 12th to Nov 16th, 2024, at the Hyatt Regency Miami Hote and on Underline for remote participants.

This poster session includes Main Conference posters and Findings from the following areas:

Ethics, Bias, and Fairness • Interpretability and Analysis of Models for NLP

In-Person Poster Session F (Jasmine)

*Coffee Breaks will be provided between 10:30 and 11:00 and 15:30 and 16:00.* To view the workshop program in detail, click [here](https://workshop-wassa.github.io/2024/schedule/) [![](https://assets.underline.io/markdown_image/1/image/12613369ab2f6dd75393ffa8794ccdd3.png)](https://app.gather.town/app/7Rf2IGR6LODvPyOx/ACL2024Workshops?spawnToken=bXLFSgsfQRy_5gc4ywWb)

W15: The 14th Workshop on Computational Approaches to Subjectivity, Sentiment & Social Media Analysis (WASSA)

workshop paper

### Welcome!
The 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2024) will take place in Bangkok, Thailand from August 11th to 16th, 2024. Our Virtual Poster Sessions will take place online Thursday, August 22, 2024.

You are required to register for this event. **Please register [here](https://2024.aclweb.org/registration). **

If you have already registered, please check your inbox for an email from Underline granting you access to ACL 2024 content.

ACL 2024

The 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2024) will take place in Bangkok, Thailand from August 11th to 16th, 2024. More information will be announced soon.

*Coffee Breaks will be provided between 10:30 and 11:00 and 15:30 and 16:00.* To view the workshop program in detail, click [here](https://hucllm-workshop.github.io)

W3: The 1st Human-Centered Large Language Modeling workshop (HuCLLM)

Findings In-Person Poster Session 3

This poster session includes Main Conference posters, TACL and CL , Demos and SRW papers.

In-Person Poster Session 3

This poster session includes Main Conference posters and Demos from the following areas: 
Discourse and Pragmatics • Generation • Machine Translation • Resources and Evaluations and Evaluation • Special Theme: Languages of Latin America

In-Person Poster Session 2

## Welcome to 2024 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics!
This year, the conference is in Mexico City. NAACL was actually already planned for Mexico City in 2021, but due to the pandemic the entire conference was moved online. This year, finally, we get to go! So it is my sincere pleasure to welcome you to Mexico City, whether in person or virtually. Having the conference in Mexico City is a good opportunity to emphasize that NAACL is our flagship conference for ACL members not only in North America but also in Central and South America, even though NAACL has been bearing “North” in its name. At this year’s conference, we have a theme to match, with a theme track on the Languages of Latin America to showcase the linguistic diversity of the region.
 
The opportunity to present at NAACL should not depend on a researcher’s travel budget, or their family status. This is why it is so important to make virtual participation at NAACL as good an experience as possible – but we want to also provide a good experience for in-person participants. As a community, we are still working out the best way to do that. This year at NAACL, we are trying out a big virtual poster session ahead of the conference, with the hope that this will make make for a lively and interactive experience. At the same time, we are reducing virtual oral presentations, which seem to be particularly tricky to make to work well. A big thanks to the NAACL program chairs and to Luciana Benotti for all their ideas and work to improve the virtual experience. And participants, virtual as well as in-person: Please let us know what worked for you and what didn’t, so we can continue to improve hybrid conferences. 
 
I have been lucky to work with many amazing people. Without their insight, dedication and patience, and without the many hours of work they put in, NAACL would not have been possible. A huge thank you to the program chairs Helena Gomez, Kevin Duh, and Steve Bethard – you are the best! 
 
Finally, I would like to thank all authors, invited speakers and panelists, area chairs and reviewers, the volunteers organizing and chairing sessions, and all attendees, in-person and virtual. Thank you for helping us make NAACL 2024 come to life. 
 
Welcome and hope you all enjoy the conference! 
Katrin Erk 
The University of Texas at Austin 
NAACL-2024 General Chair 
*You can read the full Welcome message in the [Conference Handbook (downloadable)](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1H1NvW0VASQjkSCYgw3mr-3l4yYDSxz6B/view?usp=sharing)*

To access the event page you need to register [**here.**](http://acl.swoogo.com/naacl2024) 
Your access to the event page is limited based on your registration type. If you registered for workshops only, you will gain access to full workshops content on the day of the workshops program.

NAACL 2024

2024 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Interpretability and Model Analysis in NLP

technical paper

Welcome to the 18th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL). Continuing its mission of expanding and involving the science community of all European countries, EACL has selected the Malta community for the 18th EACL. Considering the importance of physical interaction among researchers, the conference will be held at the Hotel Radisson Blu, St. Julians, in Malta, from 17 to 22 of March, 2024. The conference will also feature the possibility to participate virtually. As the flagship European conference in the field of computational linguistics, EACL welcomes European and international researchers covering a broad spectrum of research areas that are concerned with computational approaches to natural language. 
#### [Conference Handbook](https://drive.google.com/file/d/13Wn38q0yev6U3RTgnf4Tn5T9GuAuZ-xW/view?usp=sharing) *downloadable*

To access the EACL 2024 event page you need to register [**here**](https://acl.swoogo.com/EACL2024). 

EACL 2024

As the flagship European conference in the field of computational linguistics, EACL welcomes European and international researchers covering a broad spectrum of research areas that are concerned with computational approaches to natural language.

To view Day 2 Live Session Recording click [**here**](https://underline.io/events/395/sessions?eventSessionId=15300&searchGroup=lecture) SemEval is a series of international natural language processing (NLP) research workshops whose mission is to advance the current state of the art in semantic analysis and to help create high-quality annotated datasets in a range of increasingly challenging problems in natural language semantics. Each year's workshop features a collection of shared tasks in which computational semantic analysis systems designed by different teams are presented and compared.

SemEval is sponsored by the SIGLEX Special Interest Group on the Lexicon of the Association for Computational Linguistics. For more information on SemEval and its history, please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SemEval.
 For more details visit our workshop website: https://semeval.github.io/SemEval2023/
#### [Visit GatherTown](https://app.gather.town/app/5OscLswEEuYf2Psb/ACL2023)

W1: The 17th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval)_Day 1

### Welcome to ACL 2023, the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics! 
 The conference will be held in Toronto, Canada, July 9-14, 2023. 
Following the succession of the recent conferences in our field, ACL 2023 will adopt a hybrid format.
While the impact of Covid has considerably diminished in terms of traveling, obtaining visas to Canada
entails a very long process. Moreover, the global economic conditions pose challenges for many individuals to travel to conferences. Recognizing these circumstances, we know many participants may not be
able to attend the conference in person. Therefore, we are committed to providing a great virtual platform
so everyone has the opportunity to interact with other participants and enjoy the conference. Based on the
current registered participants, approxiately 30% have chosen to attend the conference virtually. Whether
you join us in person or virtually, we sincerely hope everyone has a remarkable conference experience. 
This General Chair’s message is where I express my gratitude to the many individuals who have made
enormous contributions to the conference over the past year.

Read [**ACL 2023 General Chair's message**](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WobYM7norbG4dI48s75HfJoD89qgX5a_F-6U8AteLSA/edit?usp=sharing/) in full.

##### **[Conference Handbook](https://2023.aclweb.org/downloads/acl2023-handbook.pdf)**

ACL 2023

The Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) is the premier international scientific and professional society for people working on computational problems involving human language, a field often referred to as either computational linguistics or natural language processing.

The goal of The Workshop on Online Abuse and Harms (WOAH) is to advance research that develops, interrogates and applies computational methods for detecting, classifying and modelling online abuse. For more details visit our workshop website: https://www.workshopononlineabuse.com/
#### [Visit GatherTown](https://app.gather.town/app/5OscLswEEuYf2Psb/ACL2023)

W9: The 7th Workshop on Online Abuse and Harms (WOAH)

### [Program](https://sigann.github.io/LAW-XVII-2023/program.html/)
Linguistic annotation of natural language corpora is the backbone of supervised methods of statistical natural language processing. The Linguistic Annotation Workshop (LAW) is the annual workshop of the ACL Special Interest Group on Annotation ([SIGANN](https://sigann.github.io/)), and it provides a forum for the presentation and discussion of innovative research on all aspects of linguistic annotation, including the creation and evaluation of annotation schemes, methods for automatic and manual annotation, use and evaluation of annotation software and frameworks, representation of linguistic data and annotations, semi-supervised “human in the loop” methods of annotation, crowd-sourcing approaches, and more. As in the past, the LAW will provide a forum for annotation researchers to work towards standardization, best practices, and interoperability of annotation information and software. 
For more details visit our workshop website: https://sigann.github.io/LAW-XVII-2023/
#### [Visit GatherTown](https://app.gather.town/app/5OscLswEEuYf2Psb/ACL2023)

Dirk Hovy

35

62

SHORT BIO

Presentations

Divine LLaMAs: Bias, Stereotypes, Stigmatization, and Emotion Representation of Religion in Large Language Models

Twists, Humps, and Pebbles: Multilingual Speech Recognition Models Exhibit Gender Performance Gaps

Comparing Pre-trained Human Language Models: Is it Better with Human Context as Groups, Individual Traits, or Both?

My Answer is C: First-Token Probabilities Do Not Match Text Answers in Instruction-Tuned Language Models

"My Answer is C": First-Token Probabilities Do Not Match Text Answers in Instruction-Tuned Language Models

Angry Men, Sad Women: Large Language Models Reflect Gendered Stereotypes in Emotion Attribution

Classist Tools: Social Class Correlates with Performance in NLP

Narratives at Conflict: Computational Analysis of News Framing in Multilingual Disinformation Campaigns

Compromesso! Italian Many-Shot Jailbreaks undermine the safety of Large Language Models

XSTest: A Test Suite for Identifying Exaggerated Safety Behaviours in Large Language Models

Explaining Speech Classification Models via Word-Level Audio Segments and Paralinguistic Features

MilaNLP at SemEval-2023 Task 10: Ensembling Domain-Adapted and Regularized Pretrained Language Models for Robust Sexism Detection

Respectful or Toxic? Using Zero-Shot Learning with Language Models to Detect Hate Speech

The State of Profanity Obfuscation in Natural Language Processing Scientific Publications

Temporal and Second Language Influence on Intra-Annotator Agreement and Stability in Hate Speech Labelling

The State of Profanity Obfuscation in Natural Language Processing Scientific Publications

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES