We present the BEA 2026 shared task on rubric-based short answer scoring for German. Rubric-based short answer scoring is a case of automatic short answer scoring (ASAS) that requires models to apply textual scoring rubrics to student answers as a basis for assigning scores. For the shared task, we introduced a novel German-language dataset from multiple STEM domains to provide a comprehensive benchmark for this problem. The dataset was designed to evaluate both performance and generalization (the latter, by distinguishing between seen and unseen questions), as well as coarse- and fine-grained scoring (2-way vs. 3-way). The systems submitted to the shared task cover a wide range of approaches, including fine-tuned large language models, prompt-based methods, human-AI collaboration strategies, or a combination of these. The results show that structured, task-adapted LLM systems achieved the strongest performance across all tracks. The winning system, IWM-DKM, combined LoRA fine-tuning of Qwen models with rubric-aware input structuring, including checklist-style reasoning, rubric reframing as decision trees, background knowledge injection, and ensemble voting. Other systems similarly relied on fine-tuned LLMs, retrieval-augmented prompting, encoder–LLM ensembles, or weighted aggregation strategies. Overall, the shared task results show that rubric-based scoring benefits most from systems that explicitly operationalise rubric semantics, while generalisation to unseen questions remains a central challenge.

Rubrics are the primary reference for manual scoring of constructed responses, and there is growing interest in their use in automated scoring methodologies. In this work, we propose Aspect-Grounded Rubric–Answer Alignment (AGRAA), a rubric-based end-to-end scoring framework that models rubric descriptors as latent aspect spaces. Concretely, rubric descriptors are represented as low-dimensional subspaces derived from contextualised transformer embeddings, and student responses are scored according to how strongly their representations align with these rubric-induced spaces relative to the residual space outside them. This formulation provides a geometrically grounded interpretation of rubric-based scoring while enabling end-to-end training with standard transformer encoders. We introduce three distinct architectural variants and evaluate them on multiple short-answer and essay scoring datasets. Across these tasks, AGRAA achieves predictive performance highly competitive with strong neural and feature-based baselines. In addition, the framework yields interpretable intermediate representations that expose which rubric-defined aspects contribute to scoring decisions, enabling decision-aligned explanations grounded in rubric descriptors.

Theory of Mind (ToM)—the ability to infer mental states in others—is pivotal for human social cognition. Existing evaluations of ToM in LLMs are largely limited to English, neglecting the linguistic diversity that shapes human cognition. This limitation raises a critical question: can LLMs exhibit Multilingual Theory of Mind—the capacity to reason about mental states across diverse linguistic contexts? To address this gap, we present XToM, a rigorously validated multilingual benchmark that evaluates ToM across five languages and incorporates diverse, contextually rich task scenarios. Using XToM, we systematically evaluate LLMs (e.g., DeepSeek R1), revealing a pronounced dissonance: while models excel in multilingual language understanding, their ToM performance varies across languages. Our findings expose limitations in LLMs’ ability to replicate human-like mentalizing across linguistic contexts.

LLM-based NLP systems typically work by embedding their input data into prompt templates which contain instructions and/or in-context examples, creating queries which are submitted to a LLM, then parse the LLM response in order to generate the system outputs. Prompt Injection Attacks (PIAs) are a type of subversion of these systems where a malicious user crafts special inputs which interfer with the prompt templates, causing the LLM to respond in ways unintended by the system designer.Recently, Sun and Miceli-Barone (2024) proposed a class of PIAs against LLM-based machine translation. Specifically, the task is to translate questions from the TruthfulQA test suite, where an adversarial prompt is prepended to the questions, instructing the system to ignore the translation instruction and answer the questions instead.In this test suite we extend this approach to all the language pairs of the WMT 2024 General Machine Translation task. Moreover, we include additional attack formats in addition to the one originally studied.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly becoming the preferred foundation platforms for many Natural Language Processing tasks such as Machine Translation, owing to their quality often comparable to or better than task-specific models, and the simplicity of specifying the task through natural language instructions or in-context examples.Their generality, however, opens them up to subversion by end users who may embed into their requests instructions that cause the model to behave in unauthorized and possibly unsafe ways.In this work we study these Prompt Injection Attacks (PIAs) on multiple families of LLMs on a Machine Translation task, focusing on the effects of model size on the attack success rates.We introduce a new benchmark data set and we discover that on multiple language pairs and injected prompts written in English, larger models under certain conditions may become more susceptible to successful attacks, an instance of the Inverse Scaling phenomenon (McKenzie et al., 2023).To our knowledge, this is the first work to study non-trivial LLM scaling behaviour in a multi-lingual setting.