Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userHow Large Are Lions? Inducing Distributions over Quantitative Attributes
162
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Yanai Elazar
Publication date
2019
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Most current NLP systems have little knowledge about quantitative attributes of objects and events. We propose an unsupervised method for collecting quantitative information from large amounts of web data, and use it to create a new, very large resource consisting of distributions over physical quantities associated with objects, adjectives, and verbs which we call Distributions over Quantitative (DoQ). This contrasts with recent work in this area which has focused on making only relative comparisons such as Is a lion bigger than a wolf?. Our evaluation shows that DoQ compares favorably with state of the art results on existing datasets for relative comparisons of nouns and adjectives, and on a new dataset we introduce.
rate research
Read More
As deep networks become increasingly accurate at recognizing faces, it is vital to understand how these networks process faces. While these networks are solely trained to recognize identities, they also contain face related information such as sex, age, and pose of the face. The networks are not trained to learn these attributes. We introduce expressivity as a measure of how much a feature vector informs us about an attribute, where a feature vector can be from internal or final layers of a network. Expressivity is computed by a second neural network whose inputs are features and attributes. The output of the second neural network approximates the mutual information between feature vectors and an attribute. We investigate the expressivity for two different deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) architectures: a Resnet-101 and an Inception Resnet v2. In the final fully connected layer of the networks, we found the order of expressivity for facial attributes to be Age > Sex > Yaw. Additionally, we studied the changes in the encoding of facial attributes over training iterations. We found that as training progresses, expressivities of yaw, sex, and age decrease. Our technique can be a tool for investigating the sources of bias in a network and a step towards explaining the networks identity decisions.
How can pretrained language models (PLMs) learn factual knowledge from the training set? We investigate the two most important mechanisms: reasoning and memorization. Prior work has attempted to quantify the number of facts PLMs learn, but we present, using synthetic data, the first study that investigates the causal relation between facts present in training and facts learned by the PLM. For reasoning, we show that PLMs seem to learn to apply some symbolic reasoning rules correctly but struggle with others, including two-hop reasoning. Further analysis suggests that even the application of learned reasoning rules is flawed. For memorization, we identify schema conformity (facts systematically supported by other facts) and frequency as key factors for its success.
When humans judge the affective content of texts, they also implicitly assess the correctness of such judgment, that is, their confidence. We hypothesize that peoples (in)confidence that they performed well in an annotation task leads to (dis)agreements among each other. If this is true, confidence may serve as a diagnostic tool for systematic differences in annotations. To probe our assumption, we conduct a study on a subset of the Corpus of Contemporary American English, in which we ask raters to distinguish neutral sentences from emotion-bearing ones, while scoring the confidence of their answers. Confidence turns out to approximate inter-annotator disagreements. Further, we find that confidence is correlated to emotion intensity: perceiving stronger affect in text prompts annotators to more certain classification performances. This insight is relevant for modelling studies of intensity, as it opens the question wether automatic regressors or classifiers actually predict intensity, or rather humans self-perceived confidence.
Data-driven subword segmentation has become the default strategy for open-vocabulary machine translation and other NLP tasks, but may not be sufficiently generic for optimal learning of non-concatenative morphology. We design a test suite to evaluate segmentation strategies on different types of morphological phenomena in a controlled, semi-synthetic setting. In our experiments, we compare how well machine translation models trained on subword- and character-level can translate these morphological phenomena. We find that learning to analyse and generate morphologically complex surface representations is still challenging, especially for non-concatenative morphological phenomena like reduplication or vowel harmony and for rare word stems. Based on our results, we recommend that novel text representation strategies be tested on a range of typologically diverse languages to minimise the risk of adopting a strategy that inadvertently disadvantages certain languages.
We present a new dataset of approximately 44000 comments labeled by crowdworkers. Each comment is labelled as either healthy or unhealthy, in addition to binary labels for the presence of six potentially unhealthy sub-attributes: (1) hostile; (2) antagonistic, insulting, provocative or trolling; (3) dismissive; (4) condescending or patronising; (5) sarcastic; and/or (6) an unfair generalisation. Each label also has an associated confidence score. We argue that there is a need for datasets which enable research based on a broad notion of unhealthy online conversation. We build this typology to encompass a substantial proportion of the individual comments which contribute to unhealthy online conversation. For some of these attributes, this is the first publicly available dataset of this scale. We explore the quality of the dataset, present some summary statistics and initial models to illustrate the utility of this data, and highlight limitations and directions for further research.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
