اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدExploring Transitivity in Neural NLI Models through Veridicality
148
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Despite the recent success of deep neural networks in natural language processing, the extent to which they can demonstrate human-like generalization capacities for natural language understanding remains unclear. We explore this issue in the domain of natural language inference (NLI), focusing on the transitivity of inference relations, a fundamental property for systematically drawing inferences. A model capturing transitivity can compose basic inference patterns and draw new inferences. We introduce an analysis method using synthetic and naturalistic NLI datasets involving clause-embedding verbs to evaluate whether models can perform transitivity inferences composed of veridical inferences and arbitrary inference types. We find that current NLI models do not perform consistently well on transitivity inference tasks, suggesting that they lack the generalization capacity for drawing composite inferences from provided training examples. The data and code for our analysis are publicly available at https://github.com/verypluming/transitivity.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
The Software Naturalness hypothesis argues that programming languages can be understood through the same techniques used in natural language processing. We explore this hypothesis through the use of a pre-trained transformer-based language model to p
erform code analysis tasks. Present approaches to code analysis depend heavily on features derived from the Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) while our transformer-based language models work on raw source code. This work is the first to investigate whether such language models can discover AST features automatically. To achieve this, we introduce a sequence labeling task that directly probes the language models understanding of AST. Our results show that transformer based language models achieve high accuracy in the AST tagging task. Furthermore, we evaluate our model on a software vulnerability identification task. Importantly, we show that our approach obtains vulnerability identification results comparable to graph based approaches that rely heavily on compilers for feature extraction.
To build robust question answering systems, we need the ability to verify whether answers to questions are truly correct, not just good enough in the context of imperfect QA datasets. We explore the use of natural language inference (NLI) as a way to
achieve this goal, as NLI inherently requires the premise (document context) to contain all necessary information to support the hypothesis (proposed answer to the question). We leverage large pre-trained models and recent prior datasets to construct powerful question converter and decontextualization modules, which can reformulate QA instances as premise-hypothesis pairs with very high reliability. Then, by combining standard NLI datasets with NLI examples automatically derived from QA training data, we can train NLI models to judge the correctness of QA models proposed answers. We show that our NLI approach can generally improve the confidence estimation of a QA model across different domains, evaluated in a selective QA setting. Careful manual analysis over the predictions of our NLI model shows that it can further identify cases where the QA model produces the right answer for the wrong reason, or where the answer cannot be verified as addressing all aspects of the question.
Recent studies strive to incorporate various human rationales into neural networks to improve model performance, but few pay attention to the quality of the rationales. Most existing methods distribute their models focus to distantly-labeled rational
e words entirely and equally, while ignoring the potential important non-rationale words and not distinguishing the importance of different rationale words. In this paper, we propose two novel auxiliary loss functions to make better use of distantly-labeled rationales, which encourage models to maintain their focus on important words beyond labeled rationales (PINs) and alleviate redundant training on non-helpful rationales (NoIRs). Experiments on two representative classification tasks show that our proposed methods can push a classification model to effectively learn crucial clues from non-perfect rationales while maintaining the ability to spread its focus to other unlabeled important words, thus significantly outperform existing methods.
We study estimating inherent human disagreement (annotation label distribution) in natural language inference task. Post-hoc smoothing of the predicted label distribution to match the expected label entropy is very effective. Such simple manipulation
can reduce KL divergence by almost half, yet will not improve majority label prediction accuracy or learn label distributions. To this end, we introduce a small amount of examples with multiple references into training. We depart from the standard practice of collecting a single reference per each training example, and find that collecting multiple references can achieve better accuracy under the fixed annotation budget. Lastly, we provide rich analyses comparing these two methods for improving label distribution estimation.
We investigate neural models ability to capture lexicosyntactic inferences: inferences triggered by the interaction of lexical and syntactic information. We take the task of event factuality prediction as a case study and build a factuality judgment
dataset for all English clause-embedding verbs in various syntactic contexts. We use this dataset, which we make publicly available, to probe the behavior of current state-of-the-art neural systems, showing that these systems make certain systematic errors that are clearly visible through the lens of factuality prediction.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
