Numerical claims, statements involving quantities, comparisons, and temporal references, pose unique challenges for automated fact-checking systems. In this study, we evaluate modeling strategies for veracity prediction of such claims using the QuanTemp dataset and building our own evidence retrieval pipeline. We investigate three key factors: (1) the impact of more evidences with longer input context windows using ModernBERT, (2) the effect of right-to-left (R2L) tokenization, and (3) their combined influence on classification performance. Contrary to prior findings in arithmetic reasoning tasks, R2L tokenization does not boost natural language inference (NLI) of numerical tasks. A longer context window does also not enhance veracity performance either, highlighting evidence quality as the dominant bottleneck. Our best-performing system achieves competitive macro-average F1 score of 0.57 and places us among the Top-4 submissions in Task 3 of CheckThat! 2025. Our code is available at https://github.com/dsgt-arc/checkthat-2025-numerical.
Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong performance across natural language reasoning tasks, yet their reasoning processes remain brittle and difficult to interpret. Prompting techniques like Chain-of-Thought (CoT) enhance reliability by eliciting intermediate reasoning steps or aggregating multiple outputs. However, they lack mechanisms for enforcing logical structure and assessing internal coherence. We introduce Theorem-of-Thought (ToTh), a novel framework that models reasoning as collaboration among three parallel agents, each simulating a distinct mode of inference: abductive, deductive, and inductive. Each agent produces a reasoning trace, which is structured into a formal reasoning graph. To evaluate consistency, we apply Bayesian belief propagation guided by natural language inference (NLI), assigning confidence scores to each step. The most coherent graph is selected to derive the final answer. Experiments on symbolic (WebOfLies) and numerical (MultiArith) reasoning benchmarks show that ToTh consistently outperforms CoT, Self-Consistency, and CoT-Decoding across multiple LLMs, while producing interpretable and logically grounded reasoning chains. Our findings suggest a promising direction for building more robust and cognitively inspired LLM reasoning. The implementation is available at https://github.com/KurbanIntelligenceLab/theorem-of-thought.
Scientific Natural Language Inference (NLI) is the task of predicting the semantic relation between a pair of sentences extracted from research articles. Existing datasets for this task are derived from various computer science (CS) domains, whereas non-CS domains are completely ignored. In this paper, we introduce a novel evaluation benchmark for scientific NLI, called MISMATCHED. The new MISMATCHED benchmark covers three non-CS domains-PSYCHOLOGY, ENGINEERING, and PUBLIC HEALTH, and contains 2,700 human annotated sentence pairs. We establish strong baselines on MISMATCHED using both Pre-trained Small Language Models (SLMs) and Large Language Models (LLMs). Our best performing baseline shows a Macro F1 of only 78.17% illustrating the substantial headroom for future improvements. In addition to introducing the MISMATCHED benchmark, we show that incorporating sentence pairs having an implicit scientific NLI relation between them in model training improves their performance on scientific NLI. We make our dataset and code publicly available on GitHub.
Originally, dropout was seen as a breakthrough regularization technique that reduced overfitting and improved performance in almost all applications of deep learning by reducing overfitting. Yet, single-epoch pretraining tasks common to modern LLMs yield minimal overfitting, leading to dropout not being used for large LLMs. Nevertheless, no thorough empirical investigation has been done on the role of dropout in LM pretraining. Through experiments in single-epoch pretraining of both masked (BERT) and autoregressive (Pythia 160M and 1.4B) LMs with varying levels of dropout, we find that downstream performance in language modeling, morpho-syntax (BLiMP), question answering (SQuAD), and natural-language inference (MNLI) improves when dropout is not applied during pretraining. We additionally find that the recently-introduced "early dropout" also degrades performance over applying no dropout at all. We further investigate the models' editability, and find that models trained without dropout are more successful in gradient-based model editing (MEND) and equivalent in representation-based model editing (ReFT). Therefore, we advocate to drop dropout during single-epoch pretraining.
There is increasing evidence of Human Label Variation (HLV) in Natural Language Inference (NLI), where annotators assign different labels to the same premise-hypothesis pair. However, within-label variation--cases where annotators agree on the same label but provide divergent reasoning--poses an additional and mostly overlooked challenge. Several NLI datasets contain highlighted words in the NLI item as explanations, but the same spans on the NLI item can be highlighted for different reasons, as evidenced by free-text explanations, which offer a window into annotators' reasoning. To systematically understand this problem and gain insight into the rationales behind NLI labels, we introduce LITEX, a linguistically-informed taxonomy for categorizing free-text explanations. Using this taxonomy, we annotate a subset of the e-SNLI dataset, validate the taxonomy's reliability, and analyze how it aligns with NLI labels, highlights, and explanations. We further assess the taxonomy's usefulness in explanation generation, demonstrating that conditioning generation on LITEX yields explanations that are linguistically closer to human explanations than those generated using only labels or highlights. Our approach thus not only captures within-label variation but also shows how taxonomy-guided generation for reasoning can bridge the gap between human and model explanations more effectively than existing strategies.
Human beings naturally utilize multiple reasoning modalities to learn and solve logical problems, i.e., different representational formats such as natural language, code, and symbolic logic. In contrast, most existing LLM-based approaches operate with a single reasoning modality during training, typically natural language. Although some methods explored modality selection or augmentation at inference time, the training process remains modality-blind, limiting synergy among modalities. To fill in this gap, we propose Mixture-of-Thought (MoT), a framework that enables LLMs to reason across three complementary modalities: natural language, code, and a newly introduced symbolic modality, truth-table, which systematically enumerates logical cases and partially mitigates key failure modes in natural language reasoning. MoT adopts a two-phase design: (1) self-evolving MoT training, which jointly learns from filtered, self-generated rationales across modalities; and (2) MoT inference, which fully leverages the synergy of three modalities to produce better predictions. Experiments on logical reasoning benchmarks including FOLIO and ProofWriter demonstrate that our MoT framework consistently and significantly outperforms strong LLM baselines with single-modality chain-of-thought approaches, achieving up to +11.7pp average accuracy gain. Further analyses show that our MoT framework benefits both training and inference stages; that it is particularly effective on harder logical reasoning problems; and that different modalities contribute complementary strengths, with truth-table reasoning helping to overcome key bottlenecks in natural language inference.
Embedding layers in transformer-based NLP models typically account for the largest share of model parameters, scaling with vocabulary size but not yielding performance gains proportional to scale. We propose an alternative approach in which token embedding vectors are first generated deterministically, directly from the token IDs using a Fourier expansion of their normalized values, followed by a lightweight multilayer perceptron (MLP) that captures higher-order interactions. We train standard transformers and our architecture on natural language inference tasks (SNLI and MNLI), and evaluate zero-shot performance on sentence textual similarity (STS-B). Our results demonstrate that the proposed method achieves competitive performance using significantly fewer parameters, trains faster, and operates effectively without the need for dropout. This proof-of-concept study highlights the potential for scalable, memory-efficient language models and motivates further large-scale experimentation based on our findings.
Recruiting patients to participate in clinical trials can be challenging and time-consuming. Usually, participation in a clinical trial is initiated by a healthcare professional and proposed to the patient. Promoting clinical trials directly to patients via online recruitment might help to reach them more efficiently. In this study, we address the case where a patient is initiating their own recruitment process and wants to determine whether they are eligible for a given clinical trial, using their own language to describe their medical profile. To study whether this creates difficulties in the patient trial matching process, we design a new dataset and task, Natural Language Inference for Patient Recruitment (NLI4PR), in which patient language profiles must be matched to clinical trials. We create it by adapting the TREC 2022 Clinical Trial Track dataset, which provides patients' medical profiles, and rephrasing them manually using patient language. We also use the associated clinical trial reports where the patients are either eligible or excluded. We prompt several open-source Large Language Models on our task and achieve from 56.5 to 71.8 of F1 score using patient language, against 64.7 to 73.1 for the same task using medical language. When using patient language, we observe only a small loss in performance for the best model, suggesting that having the patient as a starting point could be adopted to help recruit patients for clinical trials. The corpus and code bases are all freely available on our Github and HuggingFace repositories.
Quantifying the realism of images remains a challenging problem in the field of artificial intelligence. For example, an image of Albert Einstein holding a smartphone violates common-sense because modern smartphone were invented after Einstein's death. We introduce a novel method for assessing image realism using Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) and Natural Language Inference (NLI). Our approach is based on the premise that LVLMs may generate hallucinations when confronted with images that defy common sense. Using LVLM to extract atomic facts from these images, we obtain a mix of accurate facts and erroneous hallucinations. We proceed by calculating pairwise entailment scores among these facts, subsequently aggregating these values to yield a singular reality score. This process serves to identify contradictions between genuine facts and hallucinatory elements, signaling the presence of images that violate common sense. Our approach has achieved a new state-of-the-art performance in zero-shot mode on the WHOOPS! dataset.
LLMs are often claimed to be capable of Natural Language Inference (NLI), which is widely regarded as a cornerstone of more complex forms of reasoning. However, recent works show that LLMs still suffer from hallucinations in NLI due to attestation bias, where LLMs overly rely on propositional memory to build shortcuts. To solve the issue, we design an unsupervised framework to construct counterfactual reasoning data and fine-tune LLMs to reduce attestation bias. To measure bias reduction, we build bias-adversarial variants of NLI datasets with randomly replaced predicates in premises while keeping hypotheses unchanged. Extensive evaluations show that our framework can significantly reduce hallucinations from attestation bias. Then, we further evaluate LLMs fine-tuned with our framework on original NLI datasets and their bias-neutralized versions, where original entities are replaced with randomly sampled ones. Extensive results show that our framework consistently improves inferential performance on both original and bias-neutralized NLI datasets.
Predicting disease trajectories from electronic health records (EHRs) is a complex task due to major challenges such as data non-stationarity, high granularity of medical codes, and integration of multimodal data. EHRs contain both structured data, such as diagnostic codes, and unstructured data, such as clinical notes, which hold essential information often overlooked. Current models, primarily based on structured data, struggle to capture the complete medical context of patients, resulting in a loss of valuable information. To address this issue, we propose an approach that integrates unstructured clinical notes into transformer-based deep learning models for sequential disease prediction. This integration enriches the representation of patients' medical histories, thereby improving the accuracy of diagnosis predictions. Experiments on MIMIC-IV datasets demonstrate that the proposed approach outperforms traditional models relying solely on structured data.
Free-text explanations are expressive and easy to understand, but many datasets lack annotated explanation data, making it challenging to train models for explainable predictions. To address this, we investigate how to use existing explanation datasets for self-rationalization and evaluate models' out-of-distribution (OOD) performance. We fine-tune T5-Large and OLMo-7B models and assess the impact of fine-tuning data quality, the number of fine-tuning samples, and few-shot selection methods. The models are evaluated on 19 diverse OOD datasets across three tasks: natural language inference (NLI), fact-checking, and hallucination detection in abstractive summarization. For the generated explanation evaluation, we conduct a human study on 13 selected models and study its correlation with the Acceptability score (T5-11B) and three other LLM-based reference-free metrics. Human evaluation shows that the Acceptability score correlates most strongly with human judgments, demonstrating its effectiveness in evaluating free-text explanations. Our findings reveal: 1) few annotated examples effectively adapt models for OOD explanation generation; 2) compared to sample selection strategies, fine-tuning data source has a larger impact on OOD performance; and 3) models with higher label prediction accuracy tend to produce better explanations, as reflected by higher Acceptability scores.
Prior research on training grounded factuality classification models to detect hallucinations in large language models (LLMs) has relied on public natural language inference (NLI) data and synthetic data. However, conventional NLI datasets are not well-suited for document-level reasoning, which is critical for detecting LLM hallucinations. Recent approaches to document-level synthetic data generation involve iteratively removing sentences from documents and annotating factuality using LLM-based prompts. While effective, this method is computationally expensive for long documents and limited by the LLM's capabilities. In this work, we analyze the differences between existing synthetic training data used in state-of-the-art models and real LLM output claims. Based on our findings, we propose a novel approach for synthetic data generation, CG2C, that leverages multi-hop reasoning on context graphs extracted from documents. Our fact checker model, FactCG, demonstrates improved performance with more connected reasoning, using the same backbone models. Experiments show it even outperforms GPT-4-o on the LLM-Aggrefact benchmark with much smaller model size.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are trained on Web data that might contain spelling errors made by humans. But do they become robust to similar real-world noise? In this paper, we investigate the effect of real-world spelling mistakes on the performance of 9 language models, with parameters ranging from 0.2B to 13B, in 3 different NLP tasks, namely Natural Language Inference (NLI), Name Entity Recognition (NER), and Intent Classification (IC). We perform our experiments on 6 different languages and build a dictionary of real-world noise for them using the Wikipedia edit history. We show that the performance gap of the studied models on the clean and noisy test data averaged across all the datasets and languages ranges from 2.3 to 4.3 absolute percentage points. In addition, mT5 models, in general, show more robustness compared to BLOOM, Falcon, and BERT-like models. In particular, mT5 (13B), was the most robust on average overall, across the 3 tasks, and in 4 of the 6 languages.
Much of human communication depends on implication, conveying meaning beyond literal words to express a wider range of thoughts, intentions, and feelings. For models to better understand and facilitate human communication, they must be responsive to the text's implicit meaning. We focus on Natural Language Inference (NLI), a core tool for many language tasks, and find that state-of-the-art NLI models and datasets struggle to recognize a range of cases where entailment is implied, rather than explicit from the text. We formalize implied entailment as an extension of the NLI task and introduce the Implied NLI dataset (INLI) to help today's LLMs both recognize a broader variety of implied entailments and to distinguish between implicit and explicit entailment. We show how LLMs fine-tuned on INLI understand implied entailment and can generalize this understanding across datasets and domains.
Limited availability of multilingual text corpora for training language models often leads to poor performance on downstream tasks due to undertrained representation spaces for languages other than English. This 'under-representation' has motivated recent cross-lingual transfer methods to leverage the English representation space by e.g. mixing English and 'non-English' tokens at the input level or extending model parameters to accommodate new languages. However, these approaches often come at the cost of increased computational complexity. We propose Fusion forLanguage Representations (FLARE) in adapters, a novel method that enhances representation quality and downstream performance for languages other than English while maintaining parameter efficiency. FLARE integrates source and target language representations within low-rank (LoRA) adapters using lightweight linear transformations, maintaining parameter efficiency while improving transfer performance. A series of experiments across representative cross-lingual natural language understanding tasks, including natural language inference, question-answering and sentiment analysis, demonstrate FLARE's effectiveness. FLARE achieves performance improvements of 4.9% for Llama 3.1 and 2.2% for Gemma~2 compared to standard LoRA fine-tuning on question-answering tasks, as measured by the exact match metric.
Recent advancements in natural language processing have highlighted the vulnerability of deep learning models to adversarial attacks. While various defence mechanisms have been proposed, there is a lack of comprehensive benchmarks that evaluate these defences across diverse datasets, models, and tasks. In this work, we address this gap by presenting an extensive benchmark for textual adversarial defence that significantly expands upon previous work. Our benchmark incorporates a wide range of datasets, evaluates state-of-the-art defence mechanisms, and extends the assessment to include critical tasks such as single-sentence classification, similarity and paraphrase identification, natural language inference, and commonsense reasoning. This work not only serves as a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners in the field of adversarial robustness but also identifies key areas for future research in textual adversarial defence. By establishing a new standard for benchmarking in this domain, we aim to accelerate progress towards more robust and reliable natural language processing systems.
We introduce a new task called Defeasible Visual Entailment (DVE), where the goal is to allow the modification of the entailment relationship between an image premise and a text hypothesis based on an additional update. While this concept is well-established in Natural Language Inference, it remains unexplored in visual entailment. At a high level, DVE enables models to refine their initial interpretations, leading to improved accuracy and reliability in various applications such as detecting misleading information in images, enhancing visual question answering, and refining decision-making processes in autonomous systems. Existing metrics do not adequately capture the change in the entailment relationship brought by updates. To address this, we propose a novel inference-aware evaluator designed to capture changes in entailment strength induced by updates, using pairwise contrastive learning and categorical information learning. Additionally, we introduce a reward-driven update optimization method to further enhance the quality of updates generated by multimodal models. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed evaluator and optimization method.
The increasing reliance on large language models (LLMs) for diverse applications necessitates a thorough understanding of their robustness to adversarial perturbations and out-of-distribution (OOD) inputs. In this study, we investigate the correlation between adversarial robustness and OOD robustness in LLMs, addressing a critical gap in robustness evaluation. By applying methods originally designed to improve one robustness type across both contexts, we analyze their performance on adversarial and out-of-distribution benchmark datasets. The input of the model consists of text samples, with the output prediction evaluated in terms of accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 scores in various natural language inference tasks. Our findings highlight nuanced interactions between adversarial robustness and OOD robustness, with results indicating limited transferability between the two robustness types. Through targeted ablations, we evaluate how these correlations evolve with different model sizes and architectures, uncovering model-specific trends: smaller models like LLaMA2-7b exhibit neutral correlations, larger models like LLaMA2-13b show negative correlations, and Mixtral demonstrates positive correlations, potentially due to domain-specific alignment. These results underscore the importance of hybrid robustness frameworks that integrate adversarial and OOD strategies tailored to specific models and domains. Further research is needed to evaluate these interactions across larger models and varied architectures, offering a pathway to more reliable and generalizable LLMs.
In this work, we present two systems -- Named Entity Resolution (NER) and Natural Language Inference (NLI) -- for detecting legal violations within unstructured textual data and for associating these violations with potentially affected individuals, respectively. Both these systems are lightweight DeBERTa based encoders that outperform the LLM baselines. The proposed NER system achieved an F1 score of 60.01\% on Subtask A of the LegalLens challenge, which focuses on identifying violations. The proposed NLI system achieved an F1 score of 84.73\% on Subtask B of the LegalLens challenge, which focuses on resolving these violations by matching them with pre-existing legal complaints of class action cases. Our NER system ranked sixth and NLI system ranked fifth on the LegalLens leaderboard. We release the trained models and inference scripts.