No Arabic abstract
Natural language explanations (NLEs) are a special form of data annotation in which annotators identify rationales (most significant text tokens) when assigning labels to data instances, and write out explanations for the labels in natural language based on the rationales. NLEs have been shown to capture human reasoning better, but not as beneficial for natural language inference (NLI). In this paper, we analyze two primary flaws in the way NLEs are currently used to train explanation generators for language inference tasks. We find that the explanation generators do not take into account the variability inherent in human explanation of labels, and that the current explanation generation models generate spurious explanations. To overcome these limitations, we propose a novel framework, LIREx, that incorporates both a rationale-enabled explanation generator and an instance selector to select only relevant, plausible NLEs to augment NLI models. When evaluated on the standardized SNLI data set, LIREx achieved an accuracy of 91.87%, an improvement of 0.32 over the baseline and matching the best-reported performance on the data set. It also achieves significantly better performance than previous studies when transferred to the out-of-domain MultiNLI data set. Qualitative analysis shows that LIREx generates flexible, faithful, and relevant NLEs that allow the model to be more robust to spurious explanations. The code is available at https://github.com/zhaoxy92/LIREx.
Understanding predictions made by deep neural networks is notoriously difficult, but also crucial to their dissemination. As all machine learning based methods, they are as good as their training data, and can also capture unwanted biases. While there are tools that can help understand whether such biases exist, they do not distinguish between correlation and causation, and might be ill-suited for text-based models and for reasoning about high level language concepts. A key problem of estimating the causal effect of a concept of interest on a given model is that this estimation requires the generation of counterfactual examples, which is challenging with existing generation technology. To bridge that gap, we propose CausaLM, a framework for producing causal model explanations using counterfactual language representation models. Our approach is based on fine-tuning of deep contextualized embedding models with auxiliary adversarial tasks derived from the causal graph of the problem. Concretely, we show that by carefully choosing auxiliary adversarial pre-training tasks, language representation models such as BERT can effectively learn a counterfactual representation for a given concept of interest, and be used to estimate its true causal effect on model performance. A byproduct of our method is a language representation model that is unaffected by the tested concept, which can be useful in mitigating unwanted bias ingrained in the data.
Commonsense inference to understand and explain human language is a fundamental research problem in natural language processing. Explaining human conversations poses a great challenge as it requires contextual understanding, planning, inference, and several aspects of reasoning including causal, temporal, and commonsense reasoning. In this work, we introduce CIDER -- a manually curated dataset that contains dyadic dialogue explanations in the form of implicit and explicit knowledge triplets inferred using contextual commonsense inference. Extracting such rich explanations from conversations can be conducive to improving several downstream applications. The annotated triplets are categorized by the type of commonsense knowledge present (e.g., causal, conditional, temporal). We set up three different tasks conditioned on the annotated dataset: Dialogue-level Natural Language Inference, Span Extraction, and Multi-choice Span Selection. Baseline results obtained with transformer-based models reveal that the tasks are difficult, paving the way for promising future research. The dataset and the baseline implementations are publicly available at https://cider-task.github.io/cider/.
Natural Language Inference (NLI), also known as Recognizing Textual Entailment (RTE), is one of the most important problems in natural language processing. It requires to infer the logical relationship between two given sentences. While current approaches mostly focus on the interaction architectures of the sentences, in this paper, we propose to transfer knowledge from some important discourse markers to augment the quality of the NLI model. We observe that people usually use some discourse markers such as so or but to represent the logical relationship between two sentences. These words potentially have deep connections with the meanings of the sentences, thus can be utilized to help improve the representations of them. Moreover, we use reinforcement learning to optimize a new objective function with a reward defined by the property of the NLI datasets to make full use of the labels information. Experiments show that our method achieves the state-of-the-art performance on several large-scale datasets.
While recent research on natural language inference has considerably benefited from large annotated datasets, the amount of inference-related knowledge (including commonsense) provided in the annotated data is still rather limited. There have been two lines of approaches that can be used to further address the limitation: (1) unsupervised pretraining can leverage knowledge in much larger unstructured text data; (2) structured (often human-curated) knowledge has started to be considered in neural-network-based models for NLI. An immediate question is whether these two approaches complement each other, or how to develop models that can bring together their advantages. In this paper, we propose models that leverage structured knowledge in different components of pre-trained models. Our results show that the proposed models perform better than previous BERT-based state-of-the-art models. Although our models are proposed for NLI, they can be easily extended to other sentence or sentence-pair classification problems.
Lexical inference in context (LIiC) is the task of recognizing textual entailment between two very similar sentences, i.e., sentences that only differ in one expression. It can therefore be seen as a variant of the natural language inference task that is focused on lexical semantics. We formulate and evaluate the first approaches based on pretrained language models (LMs) for this task: (i) a few-shot NLI classifier, (ii) a relation induction approach based on handcrafted patterns expressing the semantics of lexical inference, and (iii) a variant of (ii) with patterns that were automatically extracted from a corpus. All our approaches outperform the previous state of the art, showing the potential of pretrained LMs for LIiC. In an extensive analysis, we investigate factors of success and failure of our three approaches.