-
On Evaluating Explanation Utility for Human-AI Decision Making in NLP
Authors:
Fateme Hashemi Chaleshtori,
Atreya Ghosal,
Alexander Gill,
Purbid Bambroo,
Ana Marasović
Abstract:
Is explainability a false promise? This debate has emerged from the insufficient evidence that explanations aid people in situations they are introduced for. More human-centered, application-grounded evaluations of explanations are needed to settle this. Yet, with no established guidelines for such studies in NLP, researchers accustomed to standardized proxy evaluations must discover appropriate m…
▽ More
Is explainability a false promise? This debate has emerged from the insufficient evidence that explanations aid people in situations they are introduced for. More human-centered, application-grounded evaluations of explanations are needed to settle this. Yet, with no established guidelines for such studies in NLP, researchers accustomed to standardized proxy evaluations must discover appropriate measurements, tasks, datasets, and sensible models for human-AI teams in their studies.
To help with this, we first review fitting existing metrics. We then establish requirements for datasets to be suitable for application-grounded evaluations. Among over 50 datasets available for explainability research in NLP, we find that 4 meet our criteria. By finetuning Flan-T5-3B, we demonstrate the importance of reassessing the state of the art to form and study human-AI teams. Finally, we present the exemplar studies of human-AI decision-making for one of the identified suitable tasks -- verifying the correctness of a legal claim given a contract.
△ Less
Submitted 3 July, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
-
Chain-of-Thought Unfaithfulness as Disguised Accuracy
Authors:
Oliver Bentham,
Nathan Stringham,
Ana Marasović
Abstract:
Understanding the extent to which Chain-of-Thought (CoT) generations align with a large language model's (LLM) internal computations is critical for deciding whether to trust an LLM's output. As a proxy for CoT faithfulness, Lanham et al. (2023) propose a metric that measures a model's dependence on its CoT for producing an answer. Within a single family of proprietary models, they find that LLMs…
▽ More
Understanding the extent to which Chain-of-Thought (CoT) generations align with a large language model's (LLM) internal computations is critical for deciding whether to trust an LLM's output. As a proxy for CoT faithfulness, Lanham et al. (2023) propose a metric that measures a model's dependence on its CoT for producing an answer. Within a single family of proprietary models, they find that LLMs exhibit a scaling-then-inverse-scaling relationship between model size and their measure of faithfulness, and that a 13 billion parameter model exhibits increased faithfulness compared to models ranging from 810 million to 175 billion parameters in size. We evaluate whether these results generalize as a property of all LLMs. We replicate the experimental setup in their section focused on scaling experiments with three different families of models and, under specific conditions, successfully reproduce the scaling trends for CoT faithfulness they report. However, after normalizing the metric to account for a model's bias toward certain answer choices, unfaithfulness drops significantly for smaller less-capable models. This normalized faithfulness metric is also strongly correlated ($R^2$=0.74) with accuracy, raising doubts about its validity for evaluating faithfulness.
△ Less
Submitted 21 June, 2024; v1 submitted 22 February, 2024;
originally announced February 2024.
-
Whispers of Doubt Amidst Echoes of Triumph in NLP Robustness
Authors:
Ashim Gupta,
Rishanth Rajendhran,
Nathan Stringham,
Vivek Srikumar,
Ana Marasović
Abstract:
Do larger and more performant models resolve NLP's longstanding robustness issues? We investigate this question using over 20 models of different sizes spanning different architectural choices and pretraining objectives. We conduct evaluations using (a) out-of-domain and challenge test sets, (b) behavioral testing with CheckLists, (c) contrast sets, and (d) adversarial inputs. Our analysis reveals…
▽ More
Do larger and more performant models resolve NLP's longstanding robustness issues? We investigate this question using over 20 models of different sizes spanning different architectural choices and pretraining objectives. We conduct evaluations using (a) out-of-domain and challenge test sets, (b) behavioral testing with CheckLists, (c) contrast sets, and (d) adversarial inputs. Our analysis reveals that not all out-of-domain tests provide insight into robustness. Evaluating with CheckLists and contrast sets shows significant gaps in model performance; merely scaling models does not make them adequately robust. Finally, we point out that current approaches for adversarial evaluations of models are themselves problematic: they can be easily thwarted, and in their current forms, do not represent a sufficiently deep probe of model robustness. We conclude that not only is the question of robustness in NLP as yet unresolved, but even some of the approaches to measure robustness need to be reassessed.
△ Less
Submitted 3 April, 2024; v1 submitted 16 November, 2023;
originally announced November 2023.
-
How Much Consistency Is Your Accuracy Worth?
Authors:
Jacob K. Johnson,
Ana Marasović
Abstract:
Contrast set consistency is a robustness measurement that evaluates the rate at which a model correctly responds to all instances in a bundle of minimally different examples relying on the same knowledge. To draw additional insights, we propose to complement consistency with relative consistency -- the probability that an equally accurate model would surpass the consistency of the proposed model,…
▽ More
Contrast set consistency is a robustness measurement that evaluates the rate at which a model correctly responds to all instances in a bundle of minimally different examples relying on the same knowledge. To draw additional insights, we propose to complement consistency with relative consistency -- the probability that an equally accurate model would surpass the consistency of the proposed model, given a distribution over possible consistencies. Models with 100% relative consistency have reached a consistency peak for their accuracy. We reflect on prior work that reports consistency in contrast sets and observe that relative consistency can alter the assessment of a model's consistency compared to another. We anticipate that our proposed measurement and insights will influence future studies aiming to promote consistent behavior in models.
△ Less
Submitted 20 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
CONDAQA: A Contrastive Reading Comprehension Dataset for Reasoning about Negation
Authors:
Abhilasha Ravichander,
Matt Gardner,
Ana Marasović
Abstract:
The full power of human language-based communication cannot be realized without negation. All human languages have some form of negation. Despite this, negation remains a challenging phenomenon for current natural language understanding systems. To facilitate the future development of models that can process negation effectively, we present CONDAQA, the first English reading comprehension dataset…
▽ More
The full power of human language-based communication cannot be realized without negation. All human languages have some form of negation. Despite this, negation remains a challenging phenomenon for current natural language understanding systems. To facilitate the future development of models that can process negation effectively, we present CONDAQA, the first English reading comprehension dataset which requires reasoning about the implications of negated statements in paragraphs. We collect paragraphs with diverse negation cues, then have crowdworkers ask questions about the implications of the negated statement in the passage. We also have workers make three kinds of edits to the passage -- paraphrasing the negated statement, changing the scope of the negation, and reversing the negation -- resulting in clusters of question-answer pairs that are difficult for models to answer with spurious shortcuts. CONDAQA features 14,182 question-answer pairs with over 200 unique negation cues and is challenging for current state-of-the-art models. The best performing model on CONDAQA (UnifiedQA-v2-3b) achieves only 42% on our consistency metric, well below human performance which is 81%. We release our dataset, along with fully-finetuned, few-shot, and zero-shot evaluations, to facilitate the development of future NLP methods that work on negated language.
△ Less
Submitted 1 November, 2022;
originally announced November 2022.
-
Does Self-Rationalization Improve Robustness to Spurious Correlations?
Authors:
Alexis Ross,
Matthew E. Peters,
Ana Marasović
Abstract:
Rationalization is fundamental to human reasoning and learning. NLP models trained to produce rationales along with predictions, called self-rationalization models, have been investigated for their interpretability and utility to end-users. However, the extent to which training with human-written rationales facilitates learning remains an under-explored question. We ask whether training models to…
▽ More
Rationalization is fundamental to human reasoning and learning. NLP models trained to produce rationales along with predictions, called self-rationalization models, have been investigated for their interpretability and utility to end-users. However, the extent to which training with human-written rationales facilitates learning remains an under-explored question. We ask whether training models to self-rationalize can aid in their learning to solve tasks for the right reasons. Specifically, we evaluate how training self-rationalization models with free-text rationales affects robustness to spurious correlations in fine-tuned encoder-decoder and decoder-only models of six different sizes. We evaluate robustness to spurious correlations by measuring performance on 1) manually annotated challenge datasets and 2) subsets of original test sets where reliance on spurious correlations would fail to produce correct answers. We find that while self-rationalization can improve robustness to spurious correlations in low-resource settings, it tends to hurt robustness in higher-resource settings. Furthermore, these effects depend on model family and size, as well as on rationale content. Together, our results suggest that explainability can come at the cost of robustness; thus, appropriate care should be taken when training self-rationalizing models with the goal of creating more trustworthy models.
△ Less
Submitted 24 October, 2022;
originally announced October 2022.
-
Do Androids Laugh at Electric Sheep? Humor "Understanding" Benchmarks from The New Yorker Caption Contest
Authors:
Jack Hessel,
Ana Marasović,
Jena D. Hwang,
Lillian Lee,
Jeff Da,
Rowan Zellers,
Robert Mankoff,
Ye** Choi
Abstract:
Large neural networks can now generate jokes, but do they really "understand" humor? We challenge AI models with three tasks derived from the New Yorker Cartoon Caption Contest: matching a joke to a cartoon, identifying a winning caption, and explaining why a winning caption is funny. These tasks encapsulate progressively more sophisticated aspects of "understanding" a cartoon; key elements are th…
▽ More
Large neural networks can now generate jokes, but do they really "understand" humor? We challenge AI models with three tasks derived from the New Yorker Cartoon Caption Contest: matching a joke to a cartoon, identifying a winning caption, and explaining why a winning caption is funny. These tasks encapsulate progressively more sophisticated aspects of "understanding" a cartoon; key elements are the complex, often surprising relationships between images and captions and the frequent inclusion of indirect and playful allusions to human experience and culture. We investigate both multimodal and language-only models: the former are challenged with the cartoon images directly, while the latter are given multifaceted descriptions of the visual scene to simulate human-level visual understanding. We find that both types of models struggle at all three tasks. For example, our best multimodal models fall 30 accuracy points behind human performance on the matching task, and, even when provided ground-truth visual scene descriptors, human-authored explanations are preferred head-to-head over the best machine-authored ones (few-shot GPT-4) in more than 2/3 of cases. We release models, code, leaderboard, and corpus, which includes newly-gathered annotations describing the image's locations/entities, what's unusual in the scene, and an explanation of the joke.
△ Less
Submitted 6 July, 2023; v1 submitted 13 September, 2022;
originally announced September 2022.
-
On Advances in Text Generation from Images Beyond Captioning: A Case Study in Self-Rationalization
Authors:
Shruti Palaskar,
Akshita Bhagia,
Yonatan Bisk,
Florian Metze,
Alan W Black,
Ana Marasović
Abstract:
Combining the visual modality with pretrained language models has been surprisingly effective for simple descriptive tasks such as image captioning. More general text generation however remains elusive. We take a step back and ask: How do these models work for more complex generative tasks, i.e. conditioning on both text and images? Are multimodal models simply visually adapted language models, or…
▽ More
Combining the visual modality with pretrained language models has been surprisingly effective for simple descriptive tasks such as image captioning. More general text generation however remains elusive. We take a step back and ask: How do these models work for more complex generative tasks, i.e. conditioning on both text and images? Are multimodal models simply visually adapted language models, or do they combine they reason jointly over modalities?
We investigate these questions in the context of self-rationalization (jointly generating task labels/answers and free-text explanations) of three tasks: (i) visual question answering in VQA-X, (ii) visual commonsense reasoning in VCR, and (iii) visual-textual entailment in e-SNLI-VE. We show that recent unimodal advances, CLIP image representations and scaling of language models, do not consistently improve self-rationalization in multimodal tasks. We find that no single model type works universally best across tasks, datasets, and finetuning data sizes. Our findings motivate the need for novel general backbones approach that move text generation from images and text beyond image captioning.
△ Less
Submitted 22 October, 2022; v1 submitted 23 May, 2022;
originally announced May 2022.
-
Few-Shot Self-Rationalization with Natural Language Prompts
Authors:
Ana Marasović,
Iz Beltagy,
Doug Downey,
Matthew E. Peters
Abstract:
Self-rationalization models that predict task labels and generate free-text elaborations for their predictions could enable more intuitive interaction with NLP systems. These models are, however, currently trained with a large amount of human-written free-text explanations for each task which hinders their broader usage. We propose to study a more realistic setting of self-rationalization using fe…
▽ More
Self-rationalization models that predict task labels and generate free-text elaborations for their predictions could enable more intuitive interaction with NLP systems. These models are, however, currently trained with a large amount of human-written free-text explanations for each task which hinders their broader usage. We propose to study a more realistic setting of self-rationalization using few training examples. We present FEB -- a standardized collection of four existing English-language datasets and associated metrics. We identify the right prompting approach by extensively exploring natural language prompts on FEB. Then, by using this prompt and scaling the model size, we demonstrate that making progress on few-shot self-rationalization is possible. We show there is still ample room for improvement in this task: the average plausibility of generated explanations assessed by human annotators is at most 51% (with GPT-3), while plausibility of human explanations is 76%. We hope that FEB and our proposed approach will spur the community to take on the few-shot self-rationalization challenge.
△ Less
Submitted 25 April, 2022; v1 submitted 16 November, 2021;
originally announced November 2021.
-
Effective Attention Sheds Light On Interpretability
Authors:
Kaiser Sun,
Ana Marasović
Abstract:
An attention matrix of a transformer self-attention sublayer can provably be decomposed into two components and only one of them (effective attention) contributes to the model output. This leads us to ask whether visualizing effective attention gives different conclusions than interpretation of standard attention. Using a subset of the GLUE tasks and BERT, we carry out an analysis to compare the t…
▽ More
An attention matrix of a transformer self-attention sublayer can provably be decomposed into two components and only one of them (effective attention) contributes to the model output. This leads us to ask whether visualizing effective attention gives different conclusions than interpretation of standard attention. Using a subset of the GLUE tasks and BERT, we carry out an analysis to compare the two attention matrices, and show that their interpretations differ. Effective attention is less associated with the features related to the language modeling pretraining such as the separator token, and it has more potential to illustrate linguistic features captured by the model for solving the end-task. Given the found differences, we recommend using effective attention for studying a transformer's behavior since it is more pertinent to the model output by design.
△ Less
Submitted 18 May, 2021;
originally announced May 2021.
-
Documenting Large Webtext Corpora: A Case Study on the Colossal Clean Crawled Corpus
Authors:
Jesse Dodge,
Maarten Sap,
Ana Marasović,
William Agnew,
Gabriel Ilharco,
Dirk Groeneveld,
Margaret Mitchell,
Matt Gardner
Abstract:
Large language models have led to remarkable progress on many NLP tasks, and researchers are turning to ever-larger text corpora to train them. Some of the largest corpora available are made by scra** significant portions of the internet, and are frequently introduced with only minimal documentation. In this work we provide some of the first documentation for the Colossal Clean Crawled Corpus (C…
▽ More
Large language models have led to remarkable progress on many NLP tasks, and researchers are turning to ever-larger text corpora to train them. Some of the largest corpora available are made by scra** significant portions of the internet, and are frequently introduced with only minimal documentation. In this work we provide some of the first documentation for the Colossal Clean Crawled Corpus (C4; Raffel et al., 2020), a dataset created by applying a set of filters to a single snapshot of Common Crawl. We begin by investigating where the data came from, and find a significant amount of text from unexpected sources like patents and US military websites. Then we explore the content of the text itself, and find machine-generated text (e.g., from machine translation systems) and evaluation examples from other benchmark NLP datasets. To understand the impact of the filters applied to create this dataset, we evaluate the text that was removed, and show that blocklist filtering disproportionately removes text from and about minority individuals. Finally, we conclude with some recommendations for how to created and document web-scale datasets from a scrape of the internet.
△ Less
Submitted 30 September, 2021; v1 submitted 18 April, 2021;
originally announced April 2021.
-
Teach Me to Explain: A Review of Datasets for Explainable Natural Language Processing
Authors:
Sarah Wiegreffe,
Ana Marasović
Abstract:
Explainable NLP (ExNLP) has increasingly focused on collecting human-annotated textual explanations. These explanations are used downstream in three ways: as data augmentation to improve performance on a predictive task, as supervision to train models to produce explanations for their predictions, and as a ground-truth to evaluate model-generated explanations. In this review, we identify 65 datase…
▽ More
Explainable NLP (ExNLP) has increasingly focused on collecting human-annotated textual explanations. These explanations are used downstream in three ways: as data augmentation to improve performance on a predictive task, as supervision to train models to produce explanations for their predictions, and as a ground-truth to evaluate model-generated explanations. In this review, we identify 65 datasets with three predominant classes of textual explanations (highlights, free-text, and structured), organize the literature on annotating each type, identify strengths and shortcomings of existing collection methodologies, and give recommendations for collecting ExNLP datasets in the future.
△ Less
Submitted 7 December, 2021; v1 submitted 23 February, 2021;
originally announced February 2021.
-
Promoting Graph Awareness in Linearized Graph-to-Text Generation
Authors:
Alexander Hoyle,
Ana Marasović,
Noah Smith
Abstract:
Generating text from structured inputs, such as meaning representations or RDF triples, has often involved the use of specialized graph-encoding neural networks. However, recent applications of pretrained transformers to linearizations of graph inputs have yielded state-of-the-art generation results on graph-to-text tasks. Here, we explore the ability of these linearized models to encode local gra…
▽ More
Generating text from structured inputs, such as meaning representations or RDF triples, has often involved the use of specialized graph-encoding neural networks. However, recent applications of pretrained transformers to linearizations of graph inputs have yielded state-of-the-art generation results on graph-to-text tasks. Here, we explore the ability of these linearized models to encode local graph structures, in particular their invariance to the graph linearization strategy and their ability to reconstruct corrupted inputs. Our findings motivate solutions to enrich the quality of models' implicit graph encodings via scaffolding. Namely, we use graph-denoising objectives implemented in a multi-task text-to-text framework. We find that these denoising scaffolds lead to substantial improvements in downstream generation in low-resource settings.
△ Less
Submitted 31 December, 2020;
originally announced December 2020.
-
Explaining NLP Models via Minimal Contrastive Editing (MiCE)
Authors:
Alexis Ross,
Ana Marasović,
Matthew E. Peters
Abstract:
Humans have been shown to give contrastive explanations, which explain why an observed event happened rather than some other counterfactual event (the contrast case). Despite the influential role that contrastivity plays in how humans explain, this property is largely missing from current methods for explaining NLP models. We present Minimal Contrastive Editing (MiCE), a method for producing contr…
▽ More
Humans have been shown to give contrastive explanations, which explain why an observed event happened rather than some other counterfactual event (the contrast case). Despite the influential role that contrastivity plays in how humans explain, this property is largely missing from current methods for explaining NLP models. We present Minimal Contrastive Editing (MiCE), a method for producing contrastive explanations of model predictions in the form of edits to inputs that change model outputs to the contrast case. Our experiments across three tasks--binary sentiment classification, topic classification, and multiple-choice question answering--show that MiCE is able to produce edits that are not only contrastive, but also minimal and fluent, consistent with human contrastive edits. We demonstrate how MiCE edits can be used for two use cases in NLP system development--debugging incorrect model outputs and uncovering dataset artifacts--and thereby illustrate that producing contrastive explanations is a promising research direction for model interpretability.
△ Less
Submitted 23 June, 2021; v1 submitted 27 December, 2020;
originally announced December 2020.
-
Measuring Association Between Labels and Free-Text Rationales
Authors:
Sarah Wiegreffe,
Ana Marasović,
Noah A. Smith
Abstract:
In interpretable NLP, we require faithful rationales that reflect the model's decision-making process for an explained instance. While prior work focuses on extractive rationales (a subset of the input words), we investigate their less-studied counterpart: free-text natural language rationales. We demonstrate that pipelines, existing models for faithful extractive rationalization on information-ex…
▽ More
In interpretable NLP, we require faithful rationales that reflect the model's decision-making process for an explained instance. While prior work focuses on extractive rationales (a subset of the input words), we investigate their less-studied counterpart: free-text natural language rationales. We demonstrate that pipelines, existing models for faithful extractive rationalization on information-extraction style tasks, do not extend as reliably to "reasoning" tasks requiring free-text rationales. We turn to models that jointly predict and rationalize, a class of widely used high-performance models for free-text rationalization whose faithfulness is not yet established. We define label-rationale association as a necessary property for faithfulness: the internal mechanisms of the model producing the label and the rationale must be meaningfully correlated. We propose two measurements to test this property: robustness equivalence and feature importance agreement. We find that state-of-the-art T5-based joint models exhibit both properties for rationalizing commonsense question-answering and natural language inference, indicating their potential for producing faithful free-text rationales.
△ Less
Submitted 29 August, 2022; v1 submitted 23 October, 2020;
originally announced October 2020.
-
Natural Language Rationales with Full-Stack Visual Reasoning: From Pixels to Semantic Frames to Commonsense Graphs
Authors:
Ana Marasović,
Chandra Bhagavatula,
Jae Sung Park,
Ronan Le Bras,
Noah A. Smith,
Ye** Choi
Abstract:
Natural language rationales could provide intuitive, higher-level explanations that are easily understandable by humans, complementing the more broadly studied lower-level explanations based on gradients or attention weights. We present the first study focused on generating natural language rationales across several complex visual reasoning tasks: visual commonsense reasoning, visual-textual entai…
▽ More
Natural language rationales could provide intuitive, higher-level explanations that are easily understandable by humans, complementing the more broadly studied lower-level explanations based on gradients or attention weights. We present the first study focused on generating natural language rationales across several complex visual reasoning tasks: visual commonsense reasoning, visual-textual entailment, and visual question answering. The key challenge of accurate rationalization is comprehensive image understanding at all levels: not just their explicit content at the pixel level, but their contextual contents at the semantic and pragmatic levels. We present Rationale^VT Transformer, an integrated model that learns to generate free-text rationales by combining pretrained language models with object recognition, grounded visual semantic frames, and visual commonsense graphs. Our experiments show that the base pretrained language model benefits from visual adaptation and that free-text rationalization is a promising research direction to complement model interpretability for complex visual-textual reasoning tasks.
△ Less
Submitted 15 October, 2020;
originally announced October 2020.
-
Formalizing Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Prerequisites, Causes and Goals of Human Trust in AI
Authors:
Alon Jacovi,
Ana Marasović,
Tim Miller,
Yoav Goldberg
Abstract:
Trust is a central component of the interaction between people and AI, in that 'incorrect' levels of trust may cause misuse, abuse or disuse of the technology. But what, precisely, is the nature of trust in AI? What are the prerequisites and goals of the cognitive mechanism of trust, and how can we promote them, or assess whether they are being satisfied in a given interaction? This work aims to a…
▽ More
Trust is a central component of the interaction between people and AI, in that 'incorrect' levels of trust may cause misuse, abuse or disuse of the technology. But what, precisely, is the nature of trust in AI? What are the prerequisites and goals of the cognitive mechanism of trust, and how can we promote them, or assess whether they are being satisfied in a given interaction? This work aims to answer these questions. We discuss a model of trust inspired by, but not identical to, sociology's interpersonal trust (i.e., trust between people). This model rests on two key properties of the vulnerability of the user and the ability to anticipate the impact of the AI model's decisions. We incorporate a formalization of 'contractual trust', such that trust between a user and an AI is trust that some implicit or explicit contract will hold, and a formalization of 'trustworthiness' (which detaches from the notion of trustworthiness in sociology), and with it concepts of 'warranted' and 'unwarranted' trust. We then present the possible causes of warranted trust as intrinsic reasoning and extrinsic behavior, and discuss how to design trustworthy AI, how to evaluate whether trust has manifested, and whether it is warranted. Finally, we elucidate the connection between trust and XAI using our formalization.
△ Less
Submitted 20 January, 2021; v1 submitted 14 October, 2020;
originally announced October 2020.
-
Easy, Reproducible and Quality-Controlled Data Collection with Crowdaq
Authors:
Qiang Ning,
Hao Wu,
Pradeep Dasigi,
Dheeru Dua,
Matt Gardner,
Robert L. Logan IV,
Ana Marasovic,
Zhen Nie
Abstract:
High-quality and large-scale data are key to success for AI systems. However, large-scale data annotation efforts are often confronted with a set of common challenges: (1) designing a user-friendly annotation interface; (2) training enough annotators efficiently; and (3) reproducibility. To address these problems, we introduce Crowdaq, an open-source platform that standardizes the data collection…
▽ More
High-quality and large-scale data are key to success for AI systems. However, large-scale data annotation efforts are often confronted with a set of common challenges: (1) designing a user-friendly annotation interface; (2) training enough annotators efficiently; and (3) reproducibility. To address these problems, we introduce Crowdaq, an open-source platform that standardizes the data collection pipeline with customizable user-interface components, automated annotator qualification, and saved pipelines in a re-usable format. We show that Crowdaq simplifies data annotation significantly on a diverse set of data collection use cases and we hope it will be a convenient tool for the community.
△ Less
Submitted 5 October, 2020;
originally announced October 2020.
-
Don't Stop Pretraining: Adapt Language Models to Domains and Tasks
Authors:
Suchin Gururangan,
Ana Marasović,
Swabha Swayamdipta,
Kyle Lo,
Iz Beltagy,
Doug Downey,
Noah A. Smith
Abstract:
Language models pretrained on text from a wide variety of sources form the foundation of today's NLP. In light of the success of these broad-coverage models, we investigate whether it is still helpful to tailor a pretrained model to the domain of a target task. We present a study across four domains (biomedical and computer science publications, news, and reviews) and eight classification tasks, s…
▽ More
Language models pretrained on text from a wide variety of sources form the foundation of today's NLP. In light of the success of these broad-coverage models, we investigate whether it is still helpful to tailor a pretrained model to the domain of a target task. We present a study across four domains (biomedical and computer science publications, news, and reviews) and eight classification tasks, showing that a second phase of pretraining in-domain (domain-adaptive pretraining) leads to performance gains, under both high- and low-resource settings. Moreover, adapting to the task's unlabeled data (task-adaptive pretraining) improves performance even after domain-adaptive pretraining. Finally, we show that adapting to a task corpus augmented using simple data selection strategies is an effective alternative, especially when resources for domain-adaptive pretraining might be unavailable. Overall, we consistently find that multi-phase adaptive pretraining offers large gains in task performance.
△ Less
Submitted 5 May, 2020; v1 submitted 23 April, 2020;
originally announced April 2020.
-
Quoref: A Reading Comprehension Dataset with Questions Requiring Coreferential Reasoning
Authors:
Pradeep Dasigi,
Nelson F. Liu,
Ana Marasović,
Noah A. Smith,
Matt Gardner
Abstract:
Machine comprehension of texts longer than a single sentence often requires coreference resolution. However, most current reading comprehension benchmarks do not contain complex coreferential phenomena and hence fail to evaluate the ability of models to resolve coreference. We present a new crowdsourced dataset containing more than 24K span-selection questions that require resolving coreference am…
▽ More
Machine comprehension of texts longer than a single sentence often requires coreference resolution. However, most current reading comprehension benchmarks do not contain complex coreferential phenomena and hence fail to evaluate the ability of models to resolve coreference. We present a new crowdsourced dataset containing more than 24K span-selection questions that require resolving coreference among entities in over 4.7K English paragraphs from Wikipedia. Obtaining questions focused on such phenomena is challenging, because it is hard to avoid lexical cues that shortcut complex reasoning. We deal with this issue by using a strong baseline model as an adversary in the crowdsourcing loop, which helps crowdworkers avoid writing questions with exploitable surface cues. We show that state-of-the-art reading comprehension models perform significantly worse than humans on this benchmark---the best model performance is 70.5 F1, while the estimated human performance is 93.4 F1.
△ Less
Submitted 4 September, 2019; v1 submitted 15 August, 2019;
originally announced August 2019.
-
SRL4ORL: Improving Opinion Role Labeling using Multi-task Learning with Semantic Role Labeling
Authors:
Ana Marasović,
Anette Frank
Abstract:
For over a decade, machine learning has been used to extract opinion-holder-target structures from text to answer the question "Who expressed what kind of sentiment towards what?". Recent neural approaches do not outperform the state-of-the-art feature-based models for Opinion Role Labeling (ORL). We suspect this is due to the scarcity of labeled training data and address this issue using differen…
▽ More
For over a decade, machine learning has been used to extract opinion-holder-target structures from text to answer the question "Who expressed what kind of sentiment towards what?". Recent neural approaches do not outperform the state-of-the-art feature-based models for Opinion Role Labeling (ORL). We suspect this is due to the scarcity of labeled training data and address this issue using different multi-task learning (MTL) techniques with a related task which has substantially more data, i.e. Semantic Role Labeling (SRL). We show that two MTL models improve significantly over the single-task model for labeling of both holders and targets, on the development and the test sets. We found that the vanilla MTL model which makes predictions using only shared ORL and SRL features, performs the best. With deeper analysis we determine what works and what might be done to make further improvements for ORL.
△ Less
Submitted 19 April, 2018; v1 submitted 2 November, 2017;
originally announced November 2017.
-
A Mention-Ranking Model for Abstract Anaphora Resolution
Authors:
Ana Marasović,
Leo Born,
Juri Opitz,
Anette Frank
Abstract:
Resolving abstract anaphora is an important, but difficult task for text understanding. Yet, with recent advances in representation learning this task becomes a more tangible aim. A central property of abstract anaphora is that it establishes a relation between the anaphor embedded in the anaphoric sentence and its (typically non-nominal) antecedent. We propose a mention-ranking model that learns…
▽ More
Resolving abstract anaphora is an important, but difficult task for text understanding. Yet, with recent advances in representation learning this task becomes a more tangible aim. A central property of abstract anaphora is that it establishes a relation between the anaphor embedded in the anaphoric sentence and its (typically non-nominal) antecedent. We propose a mention-ranking model that learns how abstract anaphors relate to their antecedents with an LSTM-Siamese Net. We overcome the lack of training data by generating artificial anaphoric sentence--antecedent pairs. Our model outperforms state-of-the-art results on shell noun resolution. We also report first benchmark results on an abstract anaphora subset of the ARRAU corpus. This corpus presents a greater challenge due to a mixture of nominal and pronominal anaphors and a greater range of confounders. We found model variants that outperform the baselines for nominal anaphors, without training on individual anaphor data, but still lag behind for pronominal anaphors. Our model selects syntactically plausible candidates and -- if disregarding syntax -- discriminates candidates using deeper features.
△ Less
Submitted 21 July, 2017; v1 submitted 7 June, 2017;
originally announced June 2017.
-
Multilingual Modal Sense Classification using a Convolutional Neural Network
Authors:
Ana Marasović,
Anette Frank
Abstract:
Modal sense classification (MSC) is a special WSD task that depends on the meaning of the proposition in the modal's scope. We explore a CNN architecture for classifying modal sense in English and German. We show that CNNs are superior to manually designed feature-based classifiers and a standard NN classifier. We analyze the feature maps learned by the CNN and identify known and previously unatte…
▽ More
Modal sense classification (MSC) is a special WSD task that depends on the meaning of the proposition in the modal's scope. We explore a CNN architecture for classifying modal sense in English and German. We show that CNNs are superior to manually designed feature-based classifiers and a standard NN classifier. We analyze the feature maps learned by the CNN and identify known and previously unattested linguistic features. We benchmark the CNN on a standard WSD task, where it compares favorably to models using sense-disambiguated target vectors.
△ Less
Submitted 18 August, 2016;
originally announced August 2016.