Request Correction
Use this form to request corrections to the paper metadata. Select the fields that need correction and provide the correct information.
Correction Guidelines
- Click the edit button next to a field to report a correction.
- Fill in the suggested correction value for each field you want to correct.
- Provide your name and email so we can contact you if needed.
Paper Information
Benchmarking LLMs for ARR Area Assignment: Evidence and Implications for Assignment Strategies
Paper Fields
Click the edit button next to a field to report a correction.
Benchmarking LLMs for ARR Area Assignment: Evidence and Implications for Assignment Strategies
We study how large language models (LLMs) perform at assigning ACL Rolling Review (ARR) areas from paper titles/abstracts. Using 558 papers (ACL/EACL/NAACL, 2020 to 2025), we compare multiple LLMs and prompting schemes (zero/few-shot; with/without ARR keywords; each-category variants) and analyze per-area scores, error overlap, and confusion matrices. One-shot prompting (with OpenAI-gpt-oss-20b) tends to perform best, while injecting ARR keywords often lowers accuracy. Task-bounded areas (e.g., MT, IE, QA, Summarization) are predicted more reliably, whereas broad, cross-cutting labels (e.g., Resources and Evaluation, NLP Applications) are frequently conflated, indicating taxonomy ambiguity rather than solely model limitations. We recommend hierarchical or primary-plus-secondary labels to reduce ambiguity and improve reviewer matching. Our dataset, methods, and findings offer a reproducible baseline for area selection support in ACL workflows.
Authors
Expand an author to correct their information. Use the remove button to request author removal, or add a new author.
PDF Attachment
You may attach a PDF as a corrected version of the paper. Max file size: 10MB. Only PDF files are accepted.
Your Information
Author Declaration *
Select at least one field to correct using the edit buttons above.