اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدPrediction or Comparison: Toward Interpretable Qualitative Reasoning
165
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Qualitative relationships illustrate how changing one property (e.g., moving velocity) affects another (e.g., kinetic energy) and constitutes a considerable portion of textual knowledge. Current approaches use either semantic parsers to transform natural language inputs into logical expressions or a black-box model to solve them in one step. The former has a limited application range, while the latter lacks interpretability. In this work, we categorize qualitative reasoning tasks into two types: prediction and comparison. In particular, we adopt neural network modules trained in an end-to-end manner to simulate the two reasoning processes. Experiments on two qualitative reasoning question answering datasets, QuaRTz and QuaRel, show our methods effectiveness and generalization capability, and the intermediate outputs provided by the modules make the reasoning process interpretable.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
We focus on the task of reasoning over paragraph effects in situation, which requires a model to understand the cause and effect described in a background paragraph, and apply the knowledge to a novel situation. Existing works ignore the complicated
reasoning process and solve it with a one-step black box model. Inspired by human cognitive processes, in this paper we propose a sequential approach for this task which explicitly models each step of the reasoning process with neural network modules. In particular, five reasoning modules are designed and learned in an end-to-end manner, which leads to a more interpretable model. Experimental results on the ROPES dataset demonstrate the effectiveness and explainability of our proposed approach.
Objective: To combine medical knowledge and medical data to interpretably predict the risk of disease. Methods: We formulated the disease prediction task as a random walk along a knowledge graph (KG). Specifically, we build a KG to record relationshi
ps between diseases and risk factors according to validated medical knowledge. Then, a mathematical object walks along the KG. It starts walking at a patient entity, which connects the KG based on the patient current diseases or risk factors and stops at a disease entity, which represents the predicted disease. The trajectory generated by the object represents an interpretable disease progression path of the given patient. The dynamics of the object are controlled by a policy-based reinforcement learning (RL) module, which is trained by electronic health records (EHRs). Experiments: We utilized two real-world EHR datasets to evaluate the performance of our model. In the disease prediction task, our model achieves 0.743 and 0.639 in terms of macro area under the curve (AUC) in predicting 53 circulation system diseases in the two datasets, respectively. This performance is comparable to the commonly used machine learning (ML) models in medical research. In qualitative analysis, our clinical collaborator reviewed the disease progression paths generated by our model and advocated their interpretability and reliability. Conclusion: Experimental results validate the proposed model in interpretably evaluating and optimizing disease prediction. Significance: Our work contributes to leveraging the potential of medical knowledge and medical data jointly for interpretable prediction tasks.
Large-scale, pre-trained language models (LMs) have achieved human-level performance on a breadth of language understanding tasks. However, evaluations only based on end task performance shed little light on machines true ability in language understa
nding and reasoning. In this paper, we highlight the importance of evaluating the underlying reasoning process in addition to end performance. Toward this goal, we introduce Tiered Reasoning for Intuitive Physics (TRIP), a novel commonsense reasoning dataset with dense annotations that enable multi-tiered evaluation of machines reasoning process. Our empirical results show that while large LMs can achieve high end performance, they struggle to support their predictions with valid supporting evidence. The TRIP dataset and our baseline results will motivate verifiable evaluation of commonsense reasoning and facilitate future research toward developing better language understanding and reasoning models.
Functional dependencies restrict the potential interactions among variables connected in a probabilistic network. This restriction can be exploited in qualitative probabilistic reasoning by introducing deterministic variables and modifying the infere
nce rules to produce stronger conclusions in the presence of functional relations. I describe how to accomplish these modifications in qualitative probabilistic networks by exhibiting the update procedures for graphical transformations involving probabilistic and deterministic variables and combinations. A simple example demonstrates that the augmented scheme can reduce qualitative ambiguity that would arise without the special treatment of functional dependency. Analysis of qualitative synergy reveals that new higher-order relations are required to reason effectively about synergistic interactions among deterministic variables.
This paper deals with enriched qualitative belief functions for reasoning under uncertainty and for combining information expressed in natural language through linguistic labels. In this work, two possible enrichments (quantitative and/or qualitative
) of linguistic labels are considered and operators (addition, multiplication, division, etc) for dealing with them are proposed and explained. We denote them $qe$-operators, $qe$ standing for qualitative-enriched operators. These operators can be seen as a direct extension of the classical qualitative operators ($q$-operators) proposed recently in the Dezert-Smarandache Theory of plausible and paradoxist reasoning (DSmT). $q$-operators are also justified in details in this paper. The quantitative enrichment of linguistic label is a numerical supporting degree in $[0,infty)$, while the qualitative enrichment takes its values in a finite ordered set of linguistic values. Quantitative enrichment is less precise than qualitative enrichment, but it is expected more close with what human experts can easily provide when expressing linguistic labels with supporting degrees. Two simple examples are given to show how the fusion of qualitative-enriched belief assignments can be done.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
