Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userNot not bad is not bad: A distributional account of negation
443
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Edward Grefenstette
Publication date
2013
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
With the increasing empirical success of distributional models of compositional semantics, it is timely to consider the types of textual logic that such models are capable of capturing. In this paper, we address shortcomings in the ability of current models to capture logical operations such as negation. As a solution we propose a tripartite formulation for a continuous vector space representation of semantics and subsequently use this representation to develop a formal compositional notion of negation within such models.
rate research
Read More
Attention mechanisms play a central role in NLP systems, especially within recurrent neural network (RNN) models. Recently, there has been increasing interest in whether or not the intermediate representations offered by these modules may be used to explain the reasoning for a models prediction, and consequently reach insights regarding the models decision-making process. A recent paper claims that `Attention is not Explanation (Jain and Wallace, 2019). We challenge many of the assumptions underlying this work, arguing that such a claim depends on ones definition of explanation, and that testing it needs to take into account all elements of the model, using a rigorous experimental design. We propose four alternative tests to determine when/whether attention can be used as explanation: a simple uniform-weights baseline; a variance calibration based on multiple random seed runs; a diagnostic framework using frozen weights from pretrained models; and an end-to-end adversarial attention training protocol. Each allows for meaningful interpretation of attention mechanisms in RNN models. We show that even when reliable adversarial distributions can be found, they dont perform well on the simple diagnostic, indicating that prior work does not disprove the usefulness of attention mechanisms for explainability.
Existing approaches for automated essay scoring and document representation learning typically rely on discourse parsers to incorporate discourse structure into text representation. However, the performance of parsers is not always adequate, especially when they are used on noisy texts, such as student essays. In this paper, we propose an unsupervised pre-training approach to capture discourse structure of essays in terms of coherence and cohesion that does not require any discourse parser or annotation. We introduce several types of token, sentence and paragraph-level corruption techniques for our proposed pre-training approach and augment masked language modeling pre-training with our pre-training method to leverage both contextualized and discourse information. Our proposed unsupervised approach achieves new state-of-the-art result on essay Organization scoring task.
Natural language inference requires reasoning about contradictions, negations, and their commonsense implications. Given a simple premise (e.g., Im mad at you), humans can reason about the varying shades of contradictory statements ranging from straightforward negations (Im not mad at you) to commonsense contradictions (Im happy). Moreover, these negated or contradictory statements shift the commonsense implications of the original premise in nontrivial ways. For example, while Im mad implies Im unhappy about something, negating the premise (i.e., Im not mad) does not necessarily negate the corresponding commonsense implications. In this paper, we present the first comprehensive study focusing on commonsense implications of negated statements and contradictions. We introduce ANION1, a new commonsense knowledge graph with 624K if-then rules focusing on negated and contradictory events. We then present joint generative and discriminative inference models for this new resource, providing novel empirical insights on how logical negations and commonsense contradictions reshape the commonsense implications of their original premises.
Negation is a core construction in natural language. Despite being very successful on many tasks, state-of-the-art pre-trained language models often handle negation incorrectly. To improve language models in this regard, we propose to augment the language modeling objective with an unlikelihood objective that is based on negated generic sentences from a raw text corpus. By training BERT with the resulting combined objective we reduce the mean top~1 error rate to 4% on the negated LAMA dataset. We also see some improvements on the negated NLI benchmarks.
In computational psycholinguistics, various language models have been evaluated against human reading behavior (e.g., eye movement) to build human-like computational models. However, most previous efforts have focused almost exclusively on English, despite the recent trend towards linguistic universal within the general community. In order to fill the gap, this paper investigates whether the established results in computational psycholinguistics can be generalized across languages. Specifically, we re-examine an established generalization -- the lower perplexity a language model has, the more human-like the language model is -- in Japanese with typologically different structures from English. Our experiments demonstrate that this established generalization exhibits a surprising lack of universality; namely, lower perplexity is not always human-like. Moreover, this discrepancy between English and Japanese is further explored from the perspective of (non-)uniform information density. Overall, our results suggest that a cross-lingual evaluation will be necessary to construct human-like computational models.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
