Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userExplainaBoard: An Explainable Leaderboard for NLP
107
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Pengfei Liu
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
With the rapid development of NLP research, leaderboards have emerged as one tool to track the performance of various systems on various NLP tasks. They are effective in this goal to some extent, but generally present a rather simplistic one-dimensional view of the submitted systems, communicated only through holistic accuracy numbers. In this paper, we present a new conceptualization and implementation of NLP evaluation: the ExplainaBoard, which in addition to inheriting the functionality of the standard leaderboard, also allows researchers to (i) diagnose strengths and weaknesses of a single system (e.g.~what is the best-performing system bad at?) (ii) interpret relationships between multiple systems. (e.g.~where does system A outperform system B? What if we combine systems A, B, and C?) and (iii) examine prediction results closely (e.g.~what are common errors made by multiple systems, or in what contexts do particular errors occur?). So far, ExplainaBoard covers more than 400 systems, 50 datasets, 40 languages, and 12 tasks. ExplainaBoard keeps updated and is recently upgraded by supporting (1) multilingual multi-task benchmark, (2) meta-evaluation, and (3) more complicated task: machine translation, which reviewers also suggested.} We not only released an online platform on the website url{http://explainaboard.nlpedia.ai/} but also make our evaluation tool an API with MIT Licence at Github url{https://github.com/neulab/explainaBoard} and PyPi url{https://pypi.org/project/interpret-eval/} that allows users to conveniently assess their models offline. We additionally release all output files from systems that we have run or collected to motivate output-driven research in the future.
rate research
Read More
Widespread adoption of deep models has motivated a pressing need for approaches to interpret network outputs and to facilitate model debugging. Instance attribution methods constitute one means of accomplishing these goals by retrieving training instances that (may have) led to a particular prediction. Influence functions (IF; Koh and Liang 2017) provide machinery for doing this by quantifying the effect that perturbing individual train instances would have on a specific test prediction. However, even approximating the IF is computationally expensive, to the degree that may be prohibitive in many cases. Might simpler approaches (e.g., retrieving train examples most similar to a given test point) perform comparably? In this work, we evaluate the degree to which different potential instance attribution agree with respect to the importance of training samples. We find that simple retrieval methods yield training instances that differ from those identified via gradient-based methods (such as IFs), but that nonetheless exhibit desirable characteristics similar to more complex attribution methods. Code for all methods and experiments in this paper is available at: https://github.com/successar/instance_attributions_NLP.
Many specialized domains remain untouched by deep learning, as large labeled datasets require expensive expert annotators. We address this bottleneck within the legal domain by introducing the Contract Understanding Atticus Dataset (CUAD), a new dataset for legal contract review. CUAD was created with dozens of legal experts from The Atticus Project and consists of over 13,000 annotations. The task is to highlight salient portions of a contract that are important for a human to review. We find that Transformer models have nascent performance, but that this performance is strongly influenced by model design and training dataset size. Despite these promising results, there is still substantial room for improvement. As one of the only large, specialized NLP benchmarks annotated by experts, CUAD can serve as a challenging research benchmark for the broader NLP community.
More than 200 generic drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for non-cancer indications have shown promise for treating cancer. Due to their long history of safe patient use, low cost, and widespread availability, repurposing of generic drugs represents a major opportunity to rapidly improve outcomes for cancer patients and reduce healthcare costs worldwide. Evidence on the efficacy of non-cancer generic drugs being tested for cancer exists in scientific publications, but trying to manually identify and extract such evidence is intractable. In this paper, we introduce a system to automate this evidence extraction from PubMed abstracts. Our primary contribution is to define the natural language processing pipeline required to obtain such evidence, comprising the following modules: querying, filtering, cancer type entity extraction, therapeutic association classification, and study type classification. Using the subject matter expertise on our team, we create our own datasets for these specialized domain-specific tasks. We obtain promising performance in each of the modules by utilizing modern language modeling techniques and plan to treat them as baseline approaches for future improvement of individual components.
Natural Language Processing (NLP) models have become increasingly more complex and widespread. With recent developments in neural networks, a growing concern is whether it is responsible to use these models. Concerns such as safety and ethics can be partially addressed by providing explanations. Furthermore, when models do fail, providing explanations is paramount for accountability purposes. To this end, interpretability serves to provide these explanations in terms that are understandable to humans. Central to what is understandable is how explanations are communicated. Therefore, this survey provides a categorization of how recent interpretability methods communicate explanations and discusses the methods in depth. Furthermore, the survey focuses on post-hoc methods, which provide explanations after a model is learned and generally model-agnostic. A common concern for this class of methods is whether they accurately reflect the model. Hence, how these post-hoc methods are evaluated is discussed throughout the paper.
Code-switching is the use of more than one language in the same conversation or utterance. Recently, multilingual contextual embedding models, trained on multiple monolingual corpora, have shown promising results on cross-lingual and multilingual tasks. We present an evaluation benchmark, GLUECoS, for code-switched languages, that spans several NLP tasks in English-Hindi and English-Spanish. Specifically, our evaluation benchmark includes Language Identification from text, POS tagging, Named Entity Recognition, Sentiment Analysis, Question Answering and a new task for code-switching, Natural Language Inference. We present results on all these tasks using cross-lingual word embedding models and multilingual models. In addition, we fine-tune multilingual models on artificially generated code-switched data. Although multilingual models perform significantly better than cross-lingual models, our results show that in most tasks, across both language pairs, multilingual models fine-tuned on code-switched data perform best, showing that multilingual models can be further optimized for code-switching tasks.
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
