arXiv Computation and Language

Writerslogic at the CLEF 2026 SimpleText Track: Multi-Candidate LLM Simplification and Stacked Complexity Spotting

The Writerslogic team participated in the CLEF 2026 SimpleText shared task, tackling both text simplification (Task 1) and complexity spotting (Task 2). For simplification, they built a multi‑candidate pipeline with GPT‑4o‑mini, selecting the best candidate via a reference‑free heuristic, and their Claude Sonnet 4 submission achieved a SARI of 47.43 and BLEU of 14.21, ranking third overall on the Task 1 leaderboard. For complexity spotting, they fine‑tuned a DeBERTa‑v3‑large NLI model on 350 K labeled pairs, achieving a macro F1 of 0.8081 (0.8085 in an ensemble) on binary over‑generation identification and 0.804 accuracy on multi‑class error classification, placing them second among unique teams.

arXiv AI
Jun 24

SURGELLM: Rethinking Multi-Task Evaluation through Task-Aware Feature Gating with Class-Balanced Normalization

arXiv:2606. 24259v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Fine-tuned encoders deployed across heterogeneous NLP tasks face three compounding problems: mismatched inductive biases, class-imbalance corruption of feature statistics, and no mechanism to condition attention on external lexical knowledge.

By Noor Islam S. Mohammad, Ulug Bayazit
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 25

Scoring Both Directions: LLMs realize the MRS they cannot reliably parse

The paper evaluates two large language models, Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Claude Opus 5, on the bidirectional English Resource Grammar (ERG) tasks of generating English from Minimal Recursion Semantics (MRS) and parsing English into MRS. In generation, Opus achieves 76.3 BLEU—surpassing a 72k‑pair trained system and matching a million‑pair system—while Sonnet scores 65.7 BLEU, rising to 69.6 when selecting from ACE’s candidates. In parsing, both models lag behind ACE, attaining only 57.2 and 65.5 F₁ respectively, with exact‑match on about 1 % of sentences, highlighting that high generation scores do not guarantee accurate semantic parsing.

By Soham Dan
arXiv AI
Jul 29

DecoEvo: Score-Decoupled Co-Evolution of Solver and Rubric-Generator Skills in Text Space

arXiv:2607. 25675v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Text-space optimization adapts large language models (LLMs) by editing external natural-language artifacts rather than model weights, so the optimized artifacts remain inspectable and the model can be treated as a black box.

By Jiangwang Chen, Zixin Song, Junlin Liu, Shuaiyu Zhou, Haiyan Wu, Haihan Shi, Chenxi Zhou, Hanqing Li, Xiao Yang, Da Zhu, Guanjun Jiang, Hai Wan, Xibin Zhao
arXiv AI
3d ago

Sentence-Level Context Sensitivity as a Training-Free Detector of Unsupported Content, Evaluated Against Trained Verifiers

The paper proposes a training‑free detector that uses sentence‑level context sensitivity to identify unsupported content in retrieval‑augmented generation (RAG) answers. By re‑scoring each sentence with full context, no context, and each chunk removed, the method flags the chunk whose removal most reduces a sentence’s likelihood as the likely source. Evaluated on RAGTruth, TofuEval, and RAGBench, the detector outperforms answer‑level faithfulness scores, achieving AUCs up to 0.745 and matching per‑chunk fact‑checkers while using only a fraction of the compute required by large‑language‑model judges.

By Mohamed Aly Bouke
arXiv AI
Sep 25

No More Free Lunch: Corpus Task Complexity Matters as Corpora Grow

The paper introduces Corpus Task Complexity (CTC), a metric that captures how a task’s difficulty scales with corpus size. It distinguishes low‑CTC tasks, whose difficulty grows linearly, from high‑CTC tasks, whose difficulty grows quadratically or more, and presents ten new high‑CTC tasks. Experiments show that models performing well on low‑CTC tasks often fail on high‑CTC tasks, highlighting the need for new approaches to large‑corpus reasoning.

By Prasann Singhal, Amanda Bertsch, Jacob Steinhardt, Sewon Min
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 5

M-GATE: Multilingual Grammar, Accuracy in Translation, and Efficiency Benchmark for Large Language Models

arXiv:2608. 03803v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multilingual language models are deployed across a hundred or more languages, yet most benchmarks test whether a model can perform a task _in_ a language rather than whether it commands the language itself, conflating fluency with proficiency.

By Tom\'a\v{s} Burkert, Angelika Peljak-{\L}api\'nska, David Zelen\'y
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 11

Domain-Specific Hallucination Detection in Large Language Models

The paper introduces a multi‑signal pipeline for detecting hallucinations in large language models, combining fine‑tuned DeBERTa‑v3 classification, Monte Carlo Dropout uncertainty, and temperature‑scaled calibration. On the HaluEval benchmark it achieves high performance (F1 = 0.915, AUROC = 0.977) across QA, summarization, and dialogue, and shows that 25 % of training data yields 77 % of full‑data performance. The authors also demonstrate that applying Direct Preference Optimization to a Qwen2.5‑0.5B generator cuts hallucination rates from 85.5 % to 37.7 %, and that domain‑specific fine‑tuning (PubMedBERT on SciFact) outperforms general‑domain models for biomedical text.

By Varun Teja Chundru, Debasmita Biswas
arXiv Computation and Language
3d ago

Writerslogic at PAN 2026: Process over Content for Robust Detection under Domain Shift

The paper presents the Writerslogic systems for three PAN 2026 shared tasks—Reasoning Trajectory Detection, Voight‑Kampff Generative AI Detection, and Multi‑Author Writing Style Analysis—using a unified analytical framework that prioritizes feature robustness under distribution shift. The framework distinguishes domain‑anchored, domain‑portable, and domain‑invariant features, explaining why generator‑specific traits fail while vocabulary fingerprints, compression measures, and character n‑grams remain effective. The authors report first‑place source detection and third‑place safety classification on Reasoning Trajectory Detection, a top‑scoring ensemble for Voight‑Kampff, and a detailed design for Multi‑Author Writing Style Analysis that was not evaluated due to a platform mix‑up.

By David L. Condrey