Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userContinuous Entailment Patterns for Lexical Inference in Context
485
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Martin Schmitt
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Combining a pretrained language model (PLM) with textual patterns has been shown to help in both zero- and few-shot settings. For zero-shot performance, it makes sense to design patterns that closely resemble the text seen during self-supervised pretraining because the model has never seen anything else. Supervised training allows for more flexibility. If we allow for tokens outside the PLMs vocabulary, patterns can be adapted more flexibly to a PLMs idiosyncrasies. Contrasting patterns where a token can be any continuous vector vs. those where a discrete choice between vocabulary elements has to be made, we call our method CONtinuous pAtterNs (CONAN). We evaluate CONAN on two established benchmarks for lexical inference in context (LIiC) a.k.a. predicate entailment, a challenging natural language understanding task with relatively small training sets. In a direct comparison with discrete patterns, CONAN consistently leads to improved performance, setting a new state of the art. Our experiments give valuable insights into the kind of pattern that enhances a PLMs performance on LIiC and raise important questions regarding our understanding of PLMs using text patterns.
rate research
Read More
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.
We address whether neural models for Natural Language Inference (NLI) can learn the compositional interactions between lexical entailment and negation, using four methods: the behavioral evaluation methods of (1) challenge test sets and (2) systematic generalization tasks, and the structural evaluation methods of (3) probes and (4) interventions. To facilitate this holistic evaluation, we present Monotonicity NLI (MoNLI), a new naturalistic dataset focused on lexical entailment and negation. In our behavioral evaluations, we find that models trained on general-purpose NLI datasets fail systematically on MoNLI examples containing negation, but that MoNLI fine-tuning addresses this failure. In our structural evaluations, we look for evidence that our top-performing BERT-based model has learned to implement the monotonicity algorithm behind MoNLI. Probes yield evidence consistent with this conclusion, and our intervention experiments bolster this, showing that the causal dynamics of the model mirror the causal dynamics of this algorithm on subsets of MoNLI. This suggests that the BERT model at least partially embeds a theory of lexical entailment and negation at an algorithmic level.
We present SherLIiC, a testbed for lexical inference in context (LIiC), consisting of 3985 manually annotated inference rule candidates (InfCands), accompanied by (i) ~960k unlabeled InfCands, and (ii) ~190k typed textual relations between Freebase entities extracted from the large entity-linked corpus ClueWeb09. Each InfCand consists of one of these relations, expressed as a lemmatized dependency path, and two argument placeholders, each linked to one or more Freebase types. Due to our candidate selection process based on strong distributional evidence, SherLIiC is much harder than existing testbeds because distributional evidence is of little utility in the classification of InfCands. We also show that, due to its construction, many of SherLIiCs correct InfCands are novel and missing from existing rule bases. We evaluate a number of strong baselines on SherLIiC, ranging from semantic vector space models to state of the art neural models of natural language inference (NLI). We show that SherLIiC poses a tough challenge to existing NLI systems.
A large amount of research about multimodal inference across text and vision has been recently developed to obtain visually grounded word and sentence representations. In this paper, we use logic-based representations as unified meaning representations for texts and images and present an unsupervised multimodal logical inference system that can effectively prove entailment relations between them. We show that by combining semantic parsing and theorem proving, the system can handle semantically complex sentences for visual-textual inference.
Lexical ambiguity is widespread in language, allowing for the reuse of economical word forms and therefore making language more efficient. If ambiguous words cannot be disambiguated from context, however, this gain in efficiency might make language less clear -- resulting in frequent miscommunication. For a language to be clear and efficiently encoded, we posit that the lexical ambiguity of a word type should correlate with how much information context provides about it, on average. To investigate whether this is the case, we operationalise the lexical ambiguity of a word as the entropy of meanings it can take, and provide two ways to estimate this -- one which requires human annotation (using WordNet), and one which does not (using BERT), making it readily applicable to a large number of languages. We validate these measures by showing that, on six high-resource languages, there are significant Pearson correlations between our BERT-based estimate of ambiguity and the number of synonyms a word has in WordNet (e.g. $rho = 0.40$ in English). We then test our main hypothesis -- that a words lexical ambiguity should negatively correlate with its contextual uncertainty -- and find significant correlations on all 18 typologically diverse languages we analyse. This suggests that, in the presence of ambiguity, speakers compensate by making contexts more informative.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
