-
Machine Learning with Physics Knowledge for Prediction: A Survey
Authors:
Joe Watson,
Chen Song,
Oliver Weeger,
Theo Gruner,
An T. Le,
Kay Hansel,
Ahmed Hendawy,
Oleg Arenz,
Will Trojak,
Miles Cranmer,
Carlo D'Eramo,
Fabian Bülow,
Tanmay Goyal,
Jan Peters,
Martin W. Hoffman
Abstract:
This survey examines the broad suite of methods and models for combining machine learning with physics knowledge for prediction and forecast, with a focus on partial differential equations. These methods have attracted significant interest due to their potential impact on advancing scientific research and industrial practices by improving predictive models with small- or large-scale datasets and e…
▽ More
This survey examines the broad suite of methods and models for combining machine learning with physics knowledge for prediction and forecast, with a focus on partial differential equations. These methods have attracted significant interest due to their potential impact on advancing scientific research and industrial practices by improving predictive models with small- or large-scale datasets and expressive predictive models with useful inductive biases. The survey has two parts. The first considers incorporating physics knowledge on an architectural level through objective functions, structured predictive models, and data augmentation. The second considers data as physics knowledge, which motivates looking at multi-task, meta, and contextual learning as an alternative approach to incorporating physics knowledge in a data-driven fashion. Finally, we also provide an industrial perspective on the application of these methods and a survey of the open-source ecosystem for physics-informed machine learning.
△ Less
Submitted 19 August, 2024;
originally announced August 2024.
-
LitSearch: A Retrieval Benchmark for Scientific Literature Search
Authors:
Anirudh Ajith,
Mengzhou Xia,
Alexis Chevalier,
Tanya Goyal,
Danqi Chen,
Tianyu Gao
Abstract:
Literature search questions, such as "where can I find research on the evaluation of consistency in generated summaries?" pose significant challenges for modern search engines and retrieval systems. These questions often require a deep understanding of research concepts and the ability to reason over entire articles. In this work, we introduce LitSearch, a retrieval benchmark comprising 597 realis…
▽ More
Literature search questions, such as "where can I find research on the evaluation of consistency in generated summaries?" pose significant challenges for modern search engines and retrieval systems. These questions often require a deep understanding of research concepts and the ability to reason over entire articles. In this work, we introduce LitSearch, a retrieval benchmark comprising 597 realistic literature search queries about recent ML and NLP papers. LitSearch is constructed using a combination of (1) questions generated by GPT-4 based on paragraphs containing inline citations from research papers and (2) questions about recently published papers, manually written by their authors. All LitSearch questions were manually examined or edited by experts to ensure high quality. We extensively benchmark state-of-the-art retrieval models and also evaluate two LLM-based reranking pipelines. We find a significant performance gap between BM25 and state-of-the-art dense retrievers, with a 24.8% difference in absolute recall@5. The LLM-based reranking strategies further improve the best-performing dense retriever by 4.4%. Additionally, commercial search engines and research tools like Google Search perform poorly on LitSearch, lagging behind the best dense retriever by 32 points. Taken together, these results show that LitSearch is an informative new testbed for retrieval systems while catering to a real-world use case.
△ Less
Submitted 10 July, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
-
WildHallucinations: Evaluating Long-form Factuality in LLMs with Real-World Entity Queries
Authors:
Wenting Zhao,
Tanya Goyal,
Yu Ying Chiu,
Liwei Jiang,
Benjamin Newman,
Abhilasha Ravichander,
Khyathi Chandu,
Ronan Le Bras,
Claire Cardie,
Yuntian Deng,
Yejin Choi
Abstract:
While hallucinations of large language models (LLMs) prevail as a major challenge, existing evaluation benchmarks on factuality do not cover the diverse domains of knowledge that the real-world users of LLMs seek information about. To bridge this gap, we introduce WildHallucinations, a benchmark that evaluates factuality. It does so by prompting LLMs to generate information about entities mined fr…
▽ More
While hallucinations of large language models (LLMs) prevail as a major challenge, existing evaluation benchmarks on factuality do not cover the diverse domains of knowledge that the real-world users of LLMs seek information about. To bridge this gap, we introduce WildHallucinations, a benchmark that evaluates factuality. It does so by prompting LLMs to generate information about entities mined from user-chatbot conversations in the wild. These generations are then automatically fact-checked against a systematically curated knowledge source collected from web search. Notably, half of these real-world entities do not have associated Wikipedia pages. We evaluate 118,785 generations from 15 LLMs on 7,919 entities. We find that LLMs consistently hallucinate more on entities without Wikipedia pages and exhibit varying hallucination rates across different domains. Finally, given the same base models, adding a retrieval component only slightly reduces hallucinations but does not eliminate hallucinations.
△ Less
Submitted 24 July, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
-
One Thousand and One Pairs: A "novel" challenge for long-context language models
Authors:
Marzena Karpinska,
Katherine Thai,
Kyle Lo,
Tanya Goyal,
Mohit Iyyer
Abstract:
Synthetic long-context LLM benchmarks (e.g., "needle-in-the-haystack") test only surface-level retrieval capabilities, but how well can long-context LLMs retrieve, synthesize, and reason over information across book-length inputs? We address this question by creating NoCha, a dataset of 1,001 minimally different pairs of true and false claims about 67 recently-published English fictional books, wr…
▽ More
Synthetic long-context LLM benchmarks (e.g., "needle-in-the-haystack") test only surface-level retrieval capabilities, but how well can long-context LLMs retrieve, synthesize, and reason over information across book-length inputs? We address this question by creating NoCha, a dataset of 1,001 minimally different pairs of true and false claims about 67 recently-published English fictional books, written by human readers of those books. In contrast to existing long-context benchmarks, our annotators confirm that the largest share of pairs in NoCha require global reasoning over the entire book to verify. Our experiments show that while human readers easily perform this task, it is enormously challenging for all ten long-context LLMs that we evaluate: no open-weight model performs above random chance (despite their strong performance on synthetic benchmarks), while GPT-4o achieves the highest accuracy at 55.8%. Further analysis reveals that (1) on average, models perform much better on pairs that require only sentence-level retrieval vs. global reasoning; (2) model-generated explanations for their decisions are often inaccurate even for correctly-labeled claims; and (3) models perform substantially worse on speculative fiction books that contain extensive world-building. The methodology proposed in NoCha allows for the evolution of the benchmark dataset and the easy analysis of future models.
△ Less
Submitted 18 July, 2024; v1 submitted 23 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
D2PO: Discriminator-Guided DPO with Response Evaluation Models
Authors:
Prasann Singhal,
Nathan Lambert,
Scott Niekum,
Tanya Goyal,
Greg Durrett
Abstract:
Varied approaches for aligning language models have been proposed, including supervised fine-tuning, RLHF, and direct optimization methods such as DPO. Although DPO has rapidly gained popularity due to its straightforward training process and competitive results, there is an open question of whether there remain practical advantages of using a discriminator, like a reward model, to evaluate respon…
▽ More
Varied approaches for aligning language models have been proposed, including supervised fine-tuning, RLHF, and direct optimization methods such as DPO. Although DPO has rapidly gained popularity due to its straightforward training process and competitive results, there is an open question of whether there remain practical advantages of using a discriminator, like a reward model, to evaluate responses. We propose D2PO, discriminator-guided DPO, an approach for the online setting where preferences are being collected throughout learning. As we collect gold preferences, we use these not only to train our policy, but to train a discriminative response evaluation model to silver-label even more synthetic data for policy training. We explore this approach across a set of diverse tasks, including a realistic chat setting, we find that our approach leads to higher-quality outputs compared to DPO with the same data budget, and greater efficiency in terms of preference data requirements. Furthermore, we show conditions under which silver labeling is most helpful: it is most effective when training the policy with DPO, outperforming traditional PPO, and benefits from maintaining a separate discriminator from the policy model.
△ Less
Submitted 6 August, 2024; v1 submitted 2 May, 2024;
originally announced May 2024.
-
FABLES: Evaluating faithfulness and content selection in book-length summarization
Authors:
Yekyung Kim,
Yapei Chang,
Marzena Karpinska,
Aparna Garimella,
Varun Manjunatha,
Kyle Lo,
Tanya Goyal,
Mohit Iyyer
Abstract:
While long-context large language models (LLMs) can technically summarize book-length documents (>100K tokens), the length and complexity of the documents have so far prohibited evaluations of input-dependent aspects like faithfulness. In this paper, we conduct the first large-scale human evaluation of faithfulness and content selection on LLM-generated summaries of fictional books. Our study miti…
▽ More
While long-context large language models (LLMs) can technically summarize book-length documents (>100K tokens), the length and complexity of the documents have so far prohibited evaluations of input-dependent aspects like faithfulness. In this paper, we conduct the first large-scale human evaluation of faithfulness and content selection on LLM-generated summaries of fictional books. Our study mitigates the issue of data contamination by focusing on summaries of books published in 2023 or 2024, and we hire annotators who have fully read each book prior to the annotation task to minimize cost and cognitive burden. We collect FABLES, a dataset of annotations on 3,158 claims made in LLM-generated summaries of 26 books, at a cost of $5.2K USD, which allows us to rank LLM summarizers based on faithfulness: Claude-3-Opus significantly outperforms all closed-source LLMs, while the open-source Mixtral is on par with GPT-3.5-Turbo. An analysis of the annotations reveals that most unfaithful claims relate to events and character states, and they generally require indirect reasoning over the narrative to invalidate. While LLM-based auto-raters have proven reliable for factuality and coherence in other settings, we implement several LLM raters of faithfulness and find that none correlates strongly with human annotations, especially with regard to detecting unfaithful claims. Our experiments suggest that detecting unfaithful claims is an important future direction not only for summarization evaluation but also as a testbed for long-context understanding. Finally, we move beyond faithfulness by exploring content selection errors in book-length summarization: we develop a typology of omission errors related to crucial narrative elements and also identify a systematic over-emphasis on events occurring towards the end of the book.
△ Less
Submitted 1 April, 2024;
originally announced April 2024.
-
IndiBias: A Benchmark Dataset to Measure Social Biases in Language Models for Indian Context
Authors:
Nihar Ranjan Sahoo,
Pranamya Prashant Kulkarni,
Narjis Asad,
Arif Ahmad,
Tanu Goyal,
Aparna Garimella,
Pushpak Bhattacharyya
Abstract:
The pervasive influence of social biases in language data has sparked the need for benchmark datasets that capture and evaluate these biases in Large Language Models (LLMs). Existing efforts predominantly focus on English language and the Western context, leaving a void for a reliable dataset that encapsulates India's unique socio-cultural nuances. To bridge this gap, we introduce IndiBias, a comp…
▽ More
The pervasive influence of social biases in language data has sparked the need for benchmark datasets that capture and evaluate these biases in Large Language Models (LLMs). Existing efforts predominantly focus on English language and the Western context, leaving a void for a reliable dataset that encapsulates India's unique socio-cultural nuances. To bridge this gap, we introduce IndiBias, a comprehensive benchmarking dataset designed specifically for evaluating social biases in the Indian context. We filter and translate the existing CrowS-Pairs dataset to create a benchmark dataset suited to the Indian context in Hindi language. Additionally, we leverage LLMs including ChatGPT and InstructGPT to augment our dataset with diverse societal biases and stereotypes prevalent in India. The included bias dimensions encompass gender, religion, caste, age, region, physical appearance, and occupation. We also build a resource to address intersectional biases along three intersectional dimensions. Our dataset contains 800 sentence pairs and 300 tuples for bias measurement across different demographics. The dataset is available in English and Hindi, providing a size comparable to existing benchmark datasets. Furthermore, using IndiBias we compare ten different language models on multiple bias measurement metrics. We observed that the language models exhibit more bias across a majority of the intersectional groups.
△ Less
Submitted 3 April, 2024; v1 submitted 29 March, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
-
Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Following
Authors:
Zhiyuan Zeng,
Jiatong Yu,
Tianyu Gao,
Yu Meng,
Tanya Goyal,
Danqi Chen
Abstract:
As research in large language models (LLMs) continues to accelerate, LLM-based evaluation has emerged as a scalable and cost-effective alternative to human evaluations for comparing the ever increasing list of models. This paper investigates the efficacy of these ``LLM evaluators'', particularly in using them to assess instruction following, a metric that gauges how closely generated text adheres…
▽ More
As research in large language models (LLMs) continues to accelerate, LLM-based evaluation has emerged as a scalable and cost-effective alternative to human evaluations for comparing the ever increasing list of models. This paper investigates the efficacy of these ``LLM evaluators'', particularly in using them to assess instruction following, a metric that gauges how closely generated text adheres to the given instruction. We introduce a challenging meta-evaluation benchmark, LLMBar, designed to test the ability of an LLM evaluator in discerning instruction-following outputs. The authors manually curated 419 pairs of outputs, one adhering to instructions while the other diverging, yet may possess deceptive qualities that mislead an LLM evaluator, e.g., a more engaging tone. Contrary to existing meta-evaluation, we discover that different evaluators (i.e., combinations of LLMs and prompts) exhibit distinct performance on LLMBar and even the highest-scoring ones have substantial room for improvement. We also present a novel suite of prompting strategies that further close the gap between LLM and human evaluators. With LLMBar, we hope to offer more insight into LLM evaluators and foster future research in developing better instruction-following models.
△ Less
Submitted 16 April, 2024; v1 submitted 11 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
A Long Way to Go: Investigating Length Correlations in RLHF
Authors:
Prasann Singhal,
Tanya Goyal,
Jiacheng Xu,
Greg Durrett
Abstract:
Great success has been reported using Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) to align large language models, with open preference datasets enabling wider experimentation, particularly for "helpfulness" in tasks like dialogue and web question answering. Alongside these improvements, however, RLHF also often drives models to produce longer outputs. This paper demonstrates, on three divers…
▽ More
Great success has been reported using Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) to align large language models, with open preference datasets enabling wider experimentation, particularly for "helpfulness" in tasks like dialogue and web question answering. Alongside these improvements, however, RLHF also often drives models to produce longer outputs. This paper demonstrates, on three diverse settings, that optimizing for response length is, much more than previously thought, a significant factor behind RLHF. Studying the strategies RL optimization uses to maximize reward, we find improvements in reward to largely be driven by increasing response length, instead of other features. Indeed, we find that even a purely length-based reward reproduces most downstream RLHF improvements over supervised fine-tuned models. Testing a comprehensive set of length-countering interventions, we identify the dominant source of these biases to be reward models, which, by studying training dynamics, we find are non-robust and easily influenced by length biases in preference data.
△ Less
Submitted 10 July, 2024; v1 submitted 5 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
BooookScore: A systematic exploration of book-length summarization in the era of LLMs
Authors:
Yapei Chang,
Kyle Lo,
Tanya Goyal,
Mohit Iyyer
Abstract:
Summarizing book-length documents (>100K tokens) that exceed the context window size of large language models (LLMs) requires first breaking the input document into smaller chunks and then prompting an LLM to merge, update, and compress chunk-level summaries. Despite the complexity and importance of this task, it has yet to be meaningfully studied due to the challenges of evaluation: existing book…
▽ More
Summarizing book-length documents (>100K tokens) that exceed the context window size of large language models (LLMs) requires first breaking the input document into smaller chunks and then prompting an LLM to merge, update, and compress chunk-level summaries. Despite the complexity and importance of this task, it has yet to be meaningfully studied due to the challenges of evaluation: existing book-length summarization datasets (e.g., BookSum) are in the pretraining data of most public LLMs, and existing evaluation methods struggle to capture errors made by modern LLM summarizers. In this paper, we present the first study of the coherence of LLM-based book-length summarizers implemented via two prompting workflows: (1) hierarchically merging chunk-level summaries, and (2) incrementally updating a running summary. We obtain 1193 fine-grained human annotations on GPT-4 generated summaries of 100 recently-published books and identify eight common types of coherence errors made by LLMs. Because human evaluation is expensive and time-consuming, we develop an automatic metric, BooookScore, that measures the proportion of sentences in a summary that do not contain any of the identified error types. BooookScore has high agreement with human annotations and allows us to systematically evaluate the impact of many other critical parameters (e.g., chunk size, base LLM) while saving $15K USD and 500 hours in human evaluation costs. We find that closed-source LLMs such as GPT-4 and Claude 2 produce summaries with higher BooookScore than those generated by open-source models. While LLaMA 2 falls behind other models, Mixtral achieves performance on par with GPT-3.5-Turbo. Incremental updating yields lower BooookScore but higher level of detail than hierarchical merging, a trade-off sometimes preferred by annotators.
△ Less
Submitted 13 April, 2024; v1 submitted 1 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
WiCE: Real-World Entailment for Claims in Wikipedia
Authors:
Ryo Kamoi,
Tanya Goyal,
Juan Diego Rodriguez,
Greg Durrett
Abstract:
Textual entailment models are increasingly applied in settings like fact-checking, presupposition verification in question answering, or summary evaluation. However, these represent a significant domain shift from existing entailment datasets, and models underperform as a result. We propose WiCE, a new fine-grained textual entailment dataset built on natural claim and evidence pairs extracted from…
▽ More
Textual entailment models are increasingly applied in settings like fact-checking, presupposition verification in question answering, or summary evaluation. However, these represent a significant domain shift from existing entailment datasets, and models underperform as a result. We propose WiCE, a new fine-grained textual entailment dataset built on natural claim and evidence pairs extracted from Wikipedia. In addition to standard claim-level entailment, WiCE provides entailment judgments over sub-sentence units of the claim, and a minimal subset of evidence sentences that support each subclaim. To support this, we propose an automatic claim decomposition strategy using GPT-3.5 which we show is also effective at improving entailment models' performance on multiple datasets at test time. Finally, we show that real claims in our dataset involve challenging verification and retrieval problems that existing models fail to address.
△ Less
Submitted 22 October, 2023; v1 submitted 2 March, 2023;
originally announced March 2023.
-
Shortcomings of Question Answering Based Factuality Frameworks for Error Localization
Authors:
Ryo Kamoi,
Tanya Goyal,
Greg Durrett
Abstract:
Despite recent progress in abstractive summarization, models often generate summaries with factual errors. Numerous approaches to detect these errors have been proposed, the most popular of which are question answering (QA)-based factuality metrics. These have been shown to work well at predicting summary-level factuality and have potential to localize errors within summaries, but this latter capa…
▽ More
Despite recent progress in abstractive summarization, models often generate summaries with factual errors. Numerous approaches to detect these errors have been proposed, the most popular of which are question answering (QA)-based factuality metrics. These have been shown to work well at predicting summary-level factuality and have potential to localize errors within summaries, but this latter capability has not been systematically evaluated in past research. In this paper, we conduct the first such analysis and find that, contrary to our expectations, QA-based frameworks fail to correctly identify error spans in generated summaries and are outperformed by trivial exact match baselines. Our analysis reveals a major reason for such poor localization: questions generated by the QG module often inherit errors from non-factual summaries which are then propagated further into downstream modules. Moreover, even human-in-the-loop question generation cannot easily offset these problems. Our experiments conclusively show that there exist fundamental issues with localization using the QA framework which cannot be fixed solely by stronger QA and QG models.
△ Less
Submitted 11 February, 2023; v1 submitted 13 October, 2022;
originally announced October 2022.
-
News Summarization and Evaluation in the Era of GPT-3
Authors:
Tanya Goyal,
Junyi Jessy Li,
Greg Durrett
Abstract:
The recent success of prompting large language models like GPT-3 has led to a paradigm shift in NLP research. In this paper, we study its impact on text summarization, focusing on the classic benchmark domain of news summarization. First, we investigate how GPT-3 compares against fine-tuned models trained on large summarization datasets. We show that not only do humans overwhelmingly prefer GPT-3…
▽ More
The recent success of prompting large language models like GPT-3 has led to a paradigm shift in NLP research. In this paper, we study its impact on text summarization, focusing on the classic benchmark domain of news summarization. First, we investigate how GPT-3 compares against fine-tuned models trained on large summarization datasets. We show that not only do humans overwhelmingly prefer GPT-3 summaries, prompted using only a task description, but these also do not suffer from common dataset-specific issues such as poor factuality. Next, we study what this means for evaluation, particularly the role of gold standard test sets. Our experiments show that both reference-based and reference-free automatic metrics cannot reliably evaluate GPT-3 summaries. Finally, we evaluate models on a setting beyond generic summarization, specifically keyword-based summarization, and show how dominant fine-tuning approaches compare to prompting.
To support further research, we release: (a) a corpus of 10K generated summaries from fine-tuned and prompt-based models across 4 standard summarization benchmarks, (b) 1K human preference judgments comparing different systems for generic- and keyword-based summarization.
△ Less
Submitted 23 May, 2023; v1 submitted 25 September, 2022;
originally announced September 2022.
-
Understanding Factual Errors in Summarization: Errors, Summarizers, Datasets, Error Detectors
Authors:
Liyan Tang,
Tanya Goyal,
Alexander R. Fabbri,
Philippe Laban,
Jiacheng Xu,
Semih Yavuz,
Wojciech Kryściński,
Justin F. Rousseau,
Greg Durrett
Abstract:
The propensity of abstractive summarization models to make factual errors has been studied extensively, including design of metrics to detect factual errors and annotation of errors in current systems' outputs. However, the ever-evolving nature of summarization systems, metrics, and annotated benchmarks makes factuality evaluation a moving target, and drawing clear comparisons among metrics has be…
▽ More
The propensity of abstractive summarization models to make factual errors has been studied extensively, including design of metrics to detect factual errors and annotation of errors in current systems' outputs. However, the ever-evolving nature of summarization systems, metrics, and annotated benchmarks makes factuality evaluation a moving target, and drawing clear comparisons among metrics has become increasingly difficult. In this work, we aggregate factuality error annotations from nine existing datasets and stratify them according to the underlying summarization model. We compare performance of state-of-the-art factuality metrics, including recent ChatGPT-based metrics, on this stratified benchmark and show that their performance varies significantly across different types of summarization models. Critically, our analysis shows that much of the recent improvement in the factuality detection space has been on summaries from older (pre-Transformer) models instead of more relevant recent summarization models. We further perform a finer-grained analysis per error-type and find similar performance variance across error types for different factuality metrics. Our results show that no one metric is superior in all settings or for all error types, and we provide recommendations for best practices given these insights.
△ Less
Submitted 25 May, 2023; v1 submitted 25 May, 2022;
originally announced May 2022.
-
SNaC: Coherence Error Detection for Narrative Summarization
Authors:
Tanya Goyal,
Junyi Jessy Li,
Greg Durrett
Abstract:
Progress in summarizing long texts is inhibited by the lack of appropriate evaluation frameworks. When a long summary must be produced to appropriately cover the facets of that text, that summary needs to present a coherent narrative to be understandable by a reader, but current automatic and human evaluation methods fail to identify gaps in coherence. In this work, we introduce SNaC, a narrative…
▽ More
Progress in summarizing long texts is inhibited by the lack of appropriate evaluation frameworks. When a long summary must be produced to appropriately cover the facets of that text, that summary needs to present a coherent narrative to be understandable by a reader, but current automatic and human evaluation methods fail to identify gaps in coherence. In this work, we introduce SNaC, a narrative coherence evaluation framework rooted in fine-grained annotations for long summaries. We develop a taxonomy of coherence errors in generated narrative summaries and collect span-level annotations for 6.6k sentences across 150 book and movie screenplay summaries. Our work provides the first characterization of coherence errors generated by state-of-the-art summarization models and a protocol for eliciting coherence judgments from crowd annotators. Furthermore, we show that the collected annotations allow us to train a strong classifier for automatically localizing coherence errors in generated summaries as well as benchmarking past work in coherence modeling. Finally, our SNaC framework can support future work in long document summarization and coherence evaluation, including improved summarization modeling and post-hoc summary correction.
△ Less
Submitted 28 October, 2022; v1 submitted 19 May, 2022;
originally announced May 2022.
-
NL-Augmenter: A Framework for Task-Sensitive Natural Language Augmentation
Authors:
Kaustubh D. Dhole,
Varun Gangal,
Sebastian Gehrmann,
Aadesh Gupta,
Zhenhao Li,
Saad Mahamood,
Abinaya Mahendiran,
Simon Mille,
Ashish Shrivastava,
Samson Tan,
Tongshuang Wu,
Jascha Sohl-Dickstein,
Jinho D. Choi,
Eduard Hovy,
Ondrej Dusek,
Sebastian Ruder,
Sajant Anand,
Nagender Aneja,
Rabin Banjade,
Lisa Barthe,
Hanna Behnke,
Ian Berlot-Attwell,
Connor Boyle,
Caroline Brun,
Marco Antonio Sobrevilla Cabezudo
, et al. (101 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Data augmentation is an important component in the robustness evaluation of models in natural language processing (NLP) and in enhancing the diversity of the data they are trained on. In this paper, we present NL-Augmenter, a new participatory Python-based natural language augmentation framework which supports the creation of both transformations (modifications to the data) and filters (data split…
▽ More
Data augmentation is an important component in the robustness evaluation of models in natural language processing (NLP) and in enhancing the diversity of the data they are trained on. In this paper, we present NL-Augmenter, a new participatory Python-based natural language augmentation framework which supports the creation of both transformations (modifications to the data) and filters (data splits according to specific features). We describe the framework and an initial set of 117 transformations and 23 filters for a variety of natural language tasks. We demonstrate the efficacy of NL-Augmenter by using several of its transformations to analyze the robustness of popular natural language models. The infrastructure, datacards and robustness analysis results are available publicly on the NL-Augmenter repository (https://github.com/GEM-benchmark/NL-Augmenter).
△ Less
Submitted 11 October, 2022; v1 submitted 5 December, 2021;
originally announced December 2021.
-
Training Dynamics for Text Summarization Models
Authors:
Tanya Goyal,
Jiacheng Xu,
Junyi Jessy Li,
Greg Durrett
Abstract:
Pre-trained language models (e.g. BART) have shown impressive results when fine-tuned on large summarization datasets. However, little is understood about this fine-tuning process, including what knowledge is retained from pre-training time or how content selection and generation strategies are learnt across iterations. In this work, we analyze the training dynamics for generation models, focusing…
▽ More
Pre-trained language models (e.g. BART) have shown impressive results when fine-tuned on large summarization datasets. However, little is understood about this fine-tuning process, including what knowledge is retained from pre-training time or how content selection and generation strategies are learnt across iterations. In this work, we analyze the training dynamics for generation models, focusing on summarization. Across different datasets (CNN/DM, XSum, MediaSum) and summary properties, such as abstractiveness and hallucination, we study what the model learns at different stages of its fine-tuning process. We find that a propensity to copy the input is learned early in the training process consistently across all datasets studied. On the other hand, factual errors, such as hallucination of unsupported facts, are learnt in the later stages, though this behavior is more varied across domains. Based on these observations, we explore complementary approaches for modifying training: first, disregarding high-loss tokens that are challenging to learn and second, disregarding low-loss tokens that are learnt very quickly in the latter stages of the training process. We show that these simple training modifications allow us to configure our model to achieve different goals, such as improving factuality or improving abstractiveness.
△ Less
Submitted 15 March, 2022; v1 submitted 15 October, 2021;
originally announced October 2021.
-
HydraSum: Disentangling Stylistic Features in Text Summarization using Multi-Decoder Models
Authors:
Tanya Goyal,
Nazneen Fatema Rajani,
Wenhao Liu,
Wojciech Kryściński
Abstract:
Summarization systems make numerous "decisions" about summary properties during inference, e.g. degree of copying, specificity and length of outputs, etc. However, these are implicitly encoded within model parameters and specific styles cannot be enforced. To address this, we introduce HydraSum, a new summarization architecture that extends the single decoder framework of current models to a mixtu…
▽ More
Summarization systems make numerous "decisions" about summary properties during inference, e.g. degree of copying, specificity and length of outputs, etc. However, these are implicitly encoded within model parameters and specific styles cannot be enforced. To address this, we introduce HydraSum, a new summarization architecture that extends the single decoder framework of current models to a mixture-of-experts version with multiple decoders. We show that HydraSum's multiple decoders automatically learn contrasting summary styles when trained under the standard training objective without any extra supervision. Through experiments on three summarization datasets (CNN, Newsroom and XSum), we show that HydraSum provides a simple mechanism to obtain stylistically-diverse summaries by sampling from either individual decoders or their mixtures, outperforming baseline models. Finally, we demonstrate that a small modification to the gating strategy during training can enforce an even stricter style partitioning, e.g. high- vs low-abstractiveness or high- vs low-specificity, allowing users to sample from a larger area in the generation space and vary summary styles along multiple dimensions.
△ Less
Submitted 21 October, 2022; v1 submitted 8 October, 2021;
originally announced October 2021.
-
Annotating and Modeling Fine-grained Factuality in Summarization
Authors:
Tanya Goyal,
Greg Durrett
Abstract:
Recent pre-trained abstractive summarization systems have started to achieve credible performance, but a major barrier to their use in practice is their propensity to output summaries that are not faithful to the input and that contain factual errors. While a number of annotated datasets and statistical models for assessing factuality have been explored, there is no clear picture of what errors ar…
▽ More
Recent pre-trained abstractive summarization systems have started to achieve credible performance, but a major barrier to their use in practice is their propensity to output summaries that are not faithful to the input and that contain factual errors. While a number of annotated datasets and statistical models for assessing factuality have been explored, there is no clear picture of what errors are most important to target or where current techniques are succeeding and failing. We explore both synthetic and human-labeled data sources for training models to identify factual errors in summarization, and study factuality at the word-, dependency-, and sentence-level. Our observations are threefold. First, exhibited factual errors differ significantly across datasets, and commonly-used training sets of simple synthetic errors do not reflect errors made on abstractive datasets like XSum. Second, human-labeled data with fine-grained annotations provides a more effective training signal than sentence-level annotations or synthetic data. Finally, we show that our best factuality detection model enables training of more factual XSum summarization models by allowing us to identify non-factual tokens in the training data.
△ Less
Submitted 9 April, 2021;
originally announced April 2021.
-
Evaluating Factuality in Generation with Dependency-level Entailment
Authors:
Tanya Goyal,
Greg Durrett
Abstract:
Despite significant progress in text generation models, a serious limitation is their tendency to produce text that is factually inconsistent with information in the input. Recent work has studied whether textual entailment systems can be used to identify factual errors; however, these sentence-level entailment models are trained to solve a different problem than generation filtering and they do n…
▽ More
Despite significant progress in text generation models, a serious limitation is their tendency to produce text that is factually inconsistent with information in the input. Recent work has studied whether textual entailment systems can be used to identify factual errors; however, these sentence-level entailment models are trained to solve a different problem than generation filtering and they do not localize which part of a generation is non-factual. In this paper, we propose a new formulation of entailment that decomposes it at the level of dependency arcs. Rather than focusing on aggregate decisions, we instead ask whether the semantic relationship manifested by individual dependency arcs in the generated output is supported by the input. Human judgments on this task are difficult to obtain; we therefore propose a method to automatically create data based on existing entailment or paraphrase corpora. Experiments show that our dependency arc entailment model trained on this data can identify factual inconsistencies in paraphrasing and summarization better than sentence-level methods or those based on question generation, while additionally localizing the erroneous parts of the generation.
△ Less
Submitted 22 October, 2020; v1 submitted 12 October, 2020;
originally announced October 2020.
-
Neural Syntactic Preordering for Controlled Paraphrase Generation
Authors:
Tanya Goyal,
Greg Durrett
Abstract:
Paraphrasing natural language sentences is a multifaceted process: it might involve replacing individual words or short phrases, local rearrangement of content, or high-level restructuring like topicalization or passivization. Past approaches struggle to cover this space of paraphrase possibilities in an interpretable manner. Our work, inspired by pre-ordering literature in machine translation, us…
▽ More
Paraphrasing natural language sentences is a multifaceted process: it might involve replacing individual words or short phrases, local rearrangement of content, or high-level restructuring like topicalization or passivization. Past approaches struggle to cover this space of paraphrase possibilities in an interpretable manner. Our work, inspired by pre-ordering literature in machine translation, uses syntactic transformations to softly "reorder'' the source sentence and guide our neural paraphrasing model. First, given an input sentence, we derive a set of feasible syntactic rearrangements using an encoder-decoder model. This model operates over a partially lexical, partially syntactic view of the sentence and can reorder big chunks. Next, we use each proposed rearrangement to produce a sequence of position embeddings, which encourages our final encoder-decoder paraphrase model to attend to the source words in a particular order. Our evaluation, both automatic and human, shows that the proposed system retains the quality of the baseline approaches while giving a substantial increase in the diversity of the generated paraphrases
△ Less
Submitted 5 May, 2020;
originally announced May 2020.
-
Embedding time expressions for deep temporal ordering models
Authors:
Tanya Goyal,
Greg Durrett
Abstract:
Data-driven models have demonstrated state-of-the-art performance in inferring the temporal ordering of events in text. However, these models often overlook explicit temporal signals, such as dates and time windows. Rule-based methods can be used to identify the temporal links between these time expressions (timexes), but they fail to capture timexes' interactions with events and are hard to integ…
▽ More
Data-driven models have demonstrated state-of-the-art performance in inferring the temporal ordering of events in text. However, these models often overlook explicit temporal signals, such as dates and time windows. Rule-based methods can be used to identify the temporal links between these time expressions (timexes), but they fail to capture timexes' interactions with events and are hard to integrate with the distributed representations of neural net models. In this paper, we introduce a framework to infuse temporal awareness into such models by learning a pre-trained model to embed timexes. We generate synthetic data consisting of pairs of timexes, then train a character LSTM to learn embeddings and classify the timexes' temporal relation. We evaluate the utility of these embeddings in the context of a strong neural model for event temporal ordering, and show a small increase in performance on the MATRES dataset and more substantial gains on an automatically collected dataset with more frequent event-timex interactions.
△ Less
Submitted 19 June, 2019;
originally announced June 2019.
