Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Amir Hossein Yari

dblp:400/4376 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
3since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 2 first-author · 3 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
3 papers
Language models and text generation · 66% Knowledge representation and reasoning · 15% Machine translation · 15%

Topics — the 9 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › pragmatics
idiom understanding
1.012026
Multilingual Idioms in Sentences and Conversations Across High-, Medium-, and Low-Resource Languages · ACL (1) 2026
Natural language and speech › Machine translation
machine translation evaluation
1.012026
Revisiting Metric Reliability for Fine-grained Evaluation of Machine Translation and Summarization in Indian Languages · ACL (1) 2026
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › evaluation of language models › multilingual evaluation
multilingual language model evaluation
1.012026
Multilingual Idioms in Sentences and Conversations Across High-, Medium-, and Low-Resource Languages · ACL (1) 2026
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › text summarization
summarization evaluation
1.012026
Revisiting Metric Reliability for Fine-grained Evaluation of Machine Translation and Summarization in Indian Languages · ACL (1) 2026
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
text summarization
1.012026
Revisiting Metric Reliability for Fine-grained Evaluation of Machine Translation and Summarization in Indian Languages · ACL (1) 2026
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › multilingual language models
multilingual large language model
0.912025
Unveiling Cultural Blind Spots: Analyzing the Limitations of mLLMs in Procedural Text Comprehension · ACL (1) 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model evaluation
0.312026
Revisiting Metric Reliability for Fine-grained Evaluation of Machine Translation and Summarization in Indian Languages · ACL (1) 2026
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
multilingual NLP
0.312026
Multilingual Idioms in Sentences and Conversations Across High-, Medium-, and Low-Resource Languages · ACL (1) 2026
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model evaluation › domain-specific benchmark
cultural benchmark
0.312025
Unveiling Cultural Blind Spots: Analyzing the Limitations of mLLMs in Procedural Text Comprehension · ACL (1) 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

perturbation analysis · 1.0multilingual evaluation · 1.0inter-metric correlation · 1.0human judgment alignment · 1.0benchmark construction · 1.0multiple-choice evaluation · 0.9benchmark evaluation · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Multilingual Idioms in Sentences and Conversations Across High-, Medium-, and Low-Resource Languages
abstract
Saeed Almheiri, Bilal Elbouardi, Salsabila Zahirah Pranida, Irina Nikishina, Ashwath Rao B, Parameswari Krishnamurthy, Muhammad Cendekia Airlangga, Rifo Ahmad Genadi, Nguyen Phan Gia Bao, Amir Hossein Yari, Hawau Olamide Toyin, Nurdaulet Mukhituly, Mena Attia, Besher Hassan, Ahmad Fathan Hidayatullah, Tatsuki Kuribayashi, Haonan Li, Suma Bhat, Fajri Koto. Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2026.
Saeed Almheiri, Bilal Elbouardi, Salsabila Zahirah Pranida, Irina Nikishina, Ashwath Rao, Parameswari Krishnamurthy, Muhammad Cendekia Airlangga, Rifo Ahmad Genadi, Nguyen Phan Gia Bao, Amir Hossein Yari, Hawau Olamide Toyin, Nurdaulet Mukhituly, Mena Attia, Besher Hassan, Ahmad Fathan Hidayatullah, Tatsuki Kuribayashi, Haonan Li 0002, Suma Bhat, Fajri Koto
ACL (1)10
2026 Revisiting Metric Reliability for Fine-grained Evaluation of Machine Translation and Summarization in Indian Languages
abstract
While automatic metrics drive progress in Machine Translation (MT) and Text Summarization (TS), existing metrics have been developed and validated almost exclusively for English and other high-resource languages. This narrow focus leaves Indian languages, spoken by over 1.5 billion people, largely overlooked, casting doubt on the universality of current evaluation practices. To address this gap, we introduce ITEM, a large-scale benchmark that systematically evaluates the alignment of 29 automatic metrics with human judgments across six major Indian languages, enriched with fine-grained annotations. Our extensive evaluation, covering agreement with human judgments, sensitivity to outliers, language-specific reliability, inter-metric correlations, and resilience to controlled perturbations reveals four central findings: (1) LLM-based evaluators show the strongest alignment with human judgments at both segment and system levels; (2) outliers exert a significant impact on metric-human agreement; (3) In TS, metrics are more effective at capturing content fidelity, whereas in MT, they better reflect fluency; and (4) Metrics differ in their robustness and sensitivity when subjected to diverse perturbations. Collectively, these findings offer critical guidance for advancing metric design and evaluation in Indian languages.
Amir Hossein Yari, Kalmit Kulkarni, Ahmad Raza Khan, Fajri Koto
ACL (1)1
2025 Unveiling Cultural Blind Spots: Analyzing the Limitations of mLLMs in Procedural Text Comprehension
abstract
Despite the impressive performance of multilingual large language models (mLLMs) in various natural language processing tasks, their ability to understand procedural texts, particularly those with culture-specific content, remains largely unexplored. Texts describing cultural procedures, including rituals, traditional craftsmanship, and social etiquette, require an inherent understanding of cultural context, presenting a significant challenge for mLLMs. In this work, we introduce CAPTex, a benchmark designed to evaluate mLLMs’ ability to process and reason over culturally diverse procedural texts in multiple languages. Using a range of evaluation methods, we find that (1) mLLMs struggle with culturally contextualized procedural content, particularly in low-resource languages; (2) performance varies across cultural domains, with some proving more difficult than others; and (3) models perform better on multiple-choice tasks presented in conversational formats than on direct questions. These results highlight the current limitations of mLLMs and emphasize the need for culturally informed benchmarks like CAPTex to support more accurate and inclusive language understanding.
Amir Hossein Yari, Fajri Koto
ACL (1)1