Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userThe Great Misalignment Problem in Human Evaluation of NLP Methods
مشكلة اختلال كبيرة في التقييم البشري لأساليب NLP
228
0 0
0.0
(
0
)
Created by
Shamra Editor
Ask ChatGPT about the research
نحن نبحث عن مشكلة الاختلال العظيمة في أبحاث معالجة اللغات الطبيعية، وهذا يعني ببساطة أن تعريف المشكلة لا يتماشى مع الطريقة المقترحة والتقييم البشري لا يتماشى مع التعريف ولا الطريقة.ندرس هذه المشكلة الاختلافة من خلال مسح 10 ورقات أخذ عينات عشوائيا منشورة في ACL 2020 التي ينتج عنها التقرير البشري.تظهر نتائجنا أن ورقة واحدة فقط كانت متوافقة تماما من حيث تعريف المشكلة والطريقة والتقييم.قدمت ورقتين فقط تقييم بشري يتماشى مع ما تم تصميمه في الطريقة.وتسليط الضوء على هذه النتائج أن مشكلة الاختلافة العظيمة هي رئيسة كبيرة وتؤثر على صحة وتطوير النتائج التي حصل عليها تقييم بشري.
We outline the Great Misalignment Problem in natural language processing research, this means simply that the problem definition is not in line with the method proposed and the human evaluation is not in line with the definition nor the method. We study this misalignment problem by surveying 10 randomly sampled papers published in ACL 2020 that report results with human evaluation. Our results show that only one paper was fully in line in terms of problem definition, method and evaluation. Only two papers presented a human evaluation that was in line with what was modeled in the method. These results highlight that the Great Misalignment Problem is a major one and it affects the validity and reproducibility of results obtained by a human evaluation.
References used
https://aclanthology.org/
rate research
Read More
In human-level NLP tasks, such as predicting mental health, personality, or demographics, the number of observations is often smaller than the standard 768+ hidden state sizes of each layer within modern transformer-based language models, limiting th
e ability to effectively leverage transformers. Here, we provide a systematic study on the role of dimension reduction methods (principal components analysis, factorization techniques, or multi-layer auto-encoders) as well as the dimensionality of embedding vectors and sample sizes as a function of predictive performance. We first find that fine-tuning large models with a limited amount of data pose a significant difficulty which can be overcome with a pre-trained dimension reduction regime. RoBERTa consistently achieves top performance in human-level tasks, with PCA giving benefit over other reduction methods in better handling users that write longer texts. Finally, we observe that a majority of the tasks achieve results comparable to the best performance with just 1/12 of the embedding dimensions.
Modern Natural Language Processing (NLP) makes intensive use of deep learning methods because of the accuracy they offer for a variety of applications. Due to the significant environmental impact of deep learning, cost-benefit analysis including carb
on footprint as well as accuracy measures has been suggested to better document the use of NLP methods for research or deployment. In this paper, we review the tools that are available to measure energy use and CO2 emissions of NLP methods. We describe the scope of the measures provided and compare the use of six tools (carbon tracker, experiment impact tracker, green algorithms, ML CO2 impact, energy usage and cumulator) on named entity recognition experiments performed on different computational set-ups (local server vs. computing facility). Based on these findings, we propose actionable recommendations to accurately measure the environmental impact of NLP experiments.
This paper reviews and summarizes human evaluation practices described in 97 style transfer papers with respect to three main evaluation aspects: style transfer, meaning preservation, and fluency. In principle, evaluations by human raters should be t
he most reliable. However, in style transfer papers, we find that protocols for human evaluations are often underspecified and not standardized, which hampers the reproducibility of research in this field and progress toward better human and automatic evaluation methods.
Despite state-of-the-art performance, NLP systems can be fragile in real-world situations. This is often due to insufficient understanding of the capabilities and limitations of models and the heavy reliance on standard evaluation benchmarks. Researc
h into non-standard evaluation to mitigate this brittleness is gaining increasing attention. Notably, the behavioral testing principle Checklist', which decouples testing from implementation revealed significant failures in state-of-the-art models for multiple tasks. In this paper, we present a case study of using Checklist in a practical scenario. We conduct experiments for evaluating an offensive content detection system and use a data augmentation technique for improving the model using insights from Checklist. We lay out the challenges and open questions based on our observations of using Checklist for human-in-loop evaluation and improvement of NLP systems. Disclaimer: The paper contains examples of content with offensive language. The examples do not represent the views of the authors or their employers towards any person(s), group(s), practice(s), or entity/entities.
HCI and NLP traditionally focus on different evaluation methods. While HCI involves a small number of people directly and deeply, NLP traditionally relies on standardized benchmark evaluations that involve a larger number of people indirectly. We pre
sent five methodological proposals at the intersection of HCI and NLP and situate them in the context of ML-based NLP models. Our goal is to foster interdisciplinary collaboration and progress in both fields by emphasizing what the fields can learn from each other.
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
