Large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive success across many NLP tasks, yet implicit discourse relation classification (IDRC) is still dominated by encoder-only pre-trained language models such as RoBERTa. This may be due to earlier reports that ChatGPT performs poorly on IDRC in zero-shot settings. In this paper, we show that fine-tuned LLMs can perform on par with, or even better than, existing encoder-based approaches. Nevertheless, we find that LLMs alone struggle to capture subtle lexical relations between arguments for the task. To address this, we propose a two-step strategy that enriches arguments with explicit lexical-level semantic cues before fine-tuning. Experiments demonstrate substantial gains, particularly in cross-domain scenarios, with F1 scores improved by more than 10 points compared to strong baselines.

We propose XRAG, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate the generation abilities of LLMs in cross-lingual Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) settings where the user language does not match the retrieval results. XRAG is constructed from recent news articles to ensure that its questions require external know-ledge to be answered. It covers the real-world scenarios of monolingual and multilingual retrieval, and provides relevancy annotations for each retrieved document. Our novel dataset construction pipeline results in questions that require complex reasoning, as evidenced by the significant gap between human and LLM performance. Consequently, XRAG serves as a valuable benchmark for studying LLM reasoning abilities, even before considering the additional cross-lingual complexity. Experimental results on five LLMs uncover two previously unreported challenges in cross-lingual RAG: 1) in the monolingual retrieval setting, all evaluated models struggle with response language correctness; 2) in the multilingual retrieval setting, the main challenge lies in reasoning over retrieved information across languages rather than generation of non-English text.

LLM-as-a-Judge has emerged as a popular evaluation strategy, where advanced large language models assess generation results in alignment with human instructions. While these models serve as a promising alternative to human annotators, their reliability in multilingual evaluation remains uncertain. To bridge this gap, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of multilingual LLM-as-a-Judge. Specifically, we evaluate five models from different model families across five diverse tasks involving 25 languages. Our findings reveal that LLMs struggle to achieve consistent judgment results across languages, with an average Fleiss’ Kappa of approximately 0.3, and some models performing even worse. To investigate the cause of inconsistency, we analyze various influencing factors. We observe that consistency varies significantly across languages, with particularly poor performance in low-resource languages. Additionally, we find that neither training on multilingual data nor increasing model scale directly improves judgment consistency. These findings suggest that LLMs are not yet reliable for evaluating multilingual predictions. Our work provides valuable insights into the limitations of multilingual LLM-as-a-Judge, and sheds light on future research.

In linguistics, coherence can be achieved by different means, such as by maintaining reference to the same set of entities across sentences and by establishing discourse relations between them. However, most existing work on coherence modeling focuses exclusively on either entity features or discourse relation features, with little attention given to combining the two. In this study, we explore two methods for jointly modeling entities and discourse relations for coherence assessment. Experiments on three benchmark datasets show that integrating both types of features significantly enhances the performance of coherence models, highlighting the benefits of modeling both simultaneously for coherence evaluation.

Discourse coherence theories posit relations between text spans as a key feature of coherent texts. However, existing work on coherence modeling has paid little attention to discourse relations. In this paper, we provide empirical evidence to demonstrate that relation features are correlated with text coherence. Then, we investigate a novel fusion model that uses position-aware attention and a visible matrix to combine text- and relation-based features for coherence assessment. Experimental results on two benchmarks show that our approaches can significantly improve baselines, demonstrating the importance of relation features for coherence modeling.