Here is today's selection of cs.CL papers exploring innovative approaches to semantic understanding and knowledge representation in machine translation. The common themes across these studies include enhancing model robustness through semantic paraphrasing, improving preference representation evaluations, and aligning knowledge editing processes for more faithful outcomes.

QA-Noun: Representing Nominal Semantics via Natural Language Question-Answer Pairs

Decomposing sentences into fine-grained meaning units is increasingly used to model semantic alignment. While QA-based semantic approaches have shown effectiveness for representing predicate-argument relations, they have so far left noun-centered semantics largely unaddressed. We introduce QA-Noun, a QA-based framework for capturing noun-centered semantic relations. QA-Noun defines nine question templates that cover both explicit syntactical and implicit contextual roles for nouns, producing interpretable QA pairs that complement verbal QA-SRL. We release detailed guidelines, a dataset of over 2,000 annotated noun mentions, and a trained model integrated with QA-SRL to yield a unified decomposition of sentence meaning into individual, highly fine-grained, facts. Evaluation shows that QA-Noun achieves near-complete coverage of AMR's noun arguments while surfacing additional contextually implied relations, and that combining QA-Noun with QA-SRL yields over 130\% higher granularity than recent fact-based decomposition methods such as FactScore and DecompScore. QA-Noun thus complements the broader QA-based semantic framework, forming a comprehensive and scalable approach to fine-grained semantic decomposition for cross-text alignment.

Probing Preference Representations: A Multi-Dimensional Evaluation and Analysis Method for Reward Models

Previous methods evaluate reward models by testing them on a fixed pairwise ranking test set, but they typically do not provide performance information on each preference dimension. In this work, we address the evaluation challenge of reward models by probing preference representations. To confirm the effectiveness of this evaluation method, we construct a Multi-dimensional Reward Model Benchmark (MRMBench), a collection of six probing tasks for different preference dimensions. We design it to favor and encourage reward models that better capture preferences across different dimensions. Furthermore, we introduce an analysis method, inference-time probing, which identifies the dimensions used during the reward prediction and enhances its interpretability. Through extensive experiments, we find that MRMBench strongly correlates with the alignment performance of large language models (LLMs), making it a reliable reference for developing advanced reward models. Our analysis of MRMBench evaluation results reveals that reward models often struggle to capture preferences across multiple dimensions, highlighting the potential of multi-objective optimization in reward modeling. Additionally, our findings show that the proposed inference-time probing method offers a reliable metric for assessing the confidence of reward predictions, which ultimately improves the alignment of LLMs.

Evaluating Autoformalization Robustness via Semantically Similar Paraphrasing

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently emerged as powerful tools for autoformalization. Despite their impressive performance, these models can still struggle to produce grounded and verifiable formalizations. Recent work in text-to-SQL, has revealed that LLMs can be sensitive to paraphrased natural language (NL) inputs, even when high degrees of semantic fidelity are preserved (Safarzadeh, Oroojlooyjadid, and Roth 2025). In this paper, we investigate this claim in the autoformalization domain. Specifically, we evaluate the robustness of LLMs generating formal proofs with semantically similar paraphrased NL statements by measuring semantic and compilation validity. Using the formal benchmarks MiniF2F (Zheng, Han, and Polu 2021) and Lean 4 version of ProofNet (Xin et al. 2024), and two modern LLMs, we generate paraphrased natural language statements and cross-evaluate these statements across both models. The results of this paper reveal performance variability across paraphrased inputs, demonstrating that minor shifts in NL statements can significantly impact model outputs.

Assessing LLMs for Serendipity Discovery in Knowledge Graphs: A Case for Drug Repurposing

Large Language Models (LLMs) have greatly advanced knowledge graph question answering (KGQA), yet existing systems are typically optimized for returning highly relevant but predictable answers. A missing yet desired capacity is to exploit LLMs to suggest surprise and novel ("serendipitious") answers. In this paper, we formally define the serendipity-aware KGQA task and propose the SerenQA framework to evaluate LLMs' ability to uncover unexpected insights in scientific KGQA tasks. SerenQA includes a rigorous serendipity metric based on relevance, novelty, and surprise, along with an expert-annotated benchmark derived from the Clinical Knowledge Graph, focused on drug repurposing. Additionally, it features a structured evaluation pipeline encompassing three subtasks: knowledge retrieval, subgraph reasoning, and serendipity exploration. Our experiments reveal that while state-of-the-art LLMs perform well on retrieval, they still struggle to identify genuinely surprising and valuable discoveries, underscoring a significant room for future improvements. Our curated resources and extended version are released at: https://cwru-db-group.github.io/serenQA.

Reason-KE++: Aligning the Process, Not Just the Outcome, for Faithful LLM Knowledge Editing

Aligning Large Language Models (LLMs) to be faithful to new knowledge in complex, multi-hop reasoning tasks is a critical, yet unsolved, challenge. We find that SFT-based methods, e.g., Reason-KE, while state-of-the-art, suffer from a "faithfulness gap": they optimize for format mimicry rather than sound reasoning. This gap enables the LLM's powerful parametric priors to override new contextual facts, resulting in critical factual hallucinations (e.g., incorrectly reasoning "Houston" from "NASA" despite an explicit edit). To solve this core LLM alignment problem, we propose Reason-KE++, an SFT+RL framework that instills process-level faithfulness. Its core is a Stage-aware Reward mechanism that provides dense supervision for intermediate reasoning steps (e.g., Decomposition, Sub-answer Correctness). Crucially, we identify that naive outcome-only RL is a deceptive trap for LLM alignment: it collapses reasoning integrity (e.g., 19.00% Hop acc) while superficially boosting final accuracy. Our process-aware framework sets a new SOTA of 95.48% on MQUAKE-CF-3k (+5.28%), demonstrating that for complex tasks, aligning the reasoning process is essential for building trustworthy LLMs.