United States

Explaining neural network models is important for increasing their trustworthiness in real-world applications. Most existing methods generate post-hoc explanations for neural network models by identifying individual feature attributions or detecting interactions between adjacent features. However, for models with text pairs as inputs (e.g., paraphrase identification), existing methods are not sufficient to capture feature interactions between two texts and their simple extension of computing all word-pair interactions between two texts is computationally inefficient. In this work, we propose the Group Mask (GMASK) method to implicitly detect word correlations by grouping correlated words from the input text pair together and measure their contribution to the corresponding NLP tasks as a whole. The proposed method is evaluated with two different model architectures (decomposable attention model and BERT) across four datasets, including natural language inference and paraphrase identification tasks. Experiments show the effectiveness of GMASK in providing faithful explanations to these models.


NAACL 2021

Explaining Neural Network Predictions on Sentence Pairs via Learning Word-Group Masks

2021 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics.

**Whova App** 
Stay in touch with your fellow conference attendees via the [Whova App](https://whova.com/portal/webapp/nacon_202106/)

**Conference Structure**
https://2021.naacl.org/blog/conference-structure/

**Walkthrough video of how to NAACL 2021** 

Please take a moment to view this video explaining how to navigate the platform, attend sessions network with other attendees. 


<figure class="video_container">
  <iframe src="https://screencast-o-matic.com/watch/crhwbGVh3vx?v=6&ff=1&title=0&controls=1" width=640  height=350  frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true"> </iframe>
</figure>

<br>
<br>

technical paper

We focus on a type of linguistic formal reasoning where the goal is to reason over explicit knowledge in the form of natural language facts and rules (Clark et al. 2020). A recent work, named PRover (Saha et al. 2020), performs such reasoning by answering a question and also generating a proof graph that explains the answer. However, compositional reasoning is not always unique and there may be multiple ways of reaching the correct answer. Thus, in our work, we address a new and challenging problem of generating multiple proof graphs for reasoning over natural language rule-bases. Each proof provides a different rationale for the answer, thereby improving the interpretability of such reasoning systems. In order to jointly learn from all proof graphs and exploit the correlations between multiple proofs for a question, we pose this task as a set generation problem over structured output spaces where each proof is represented as a directed graph. We propose two variants of a proof-set generation model, multiPRover. Our first model, Multilabel-multiPRover, generates a set of proofs via multi-label classification and implicit conditioning between the proofs; while the second model, Iterative-multiPRover, generates proofs iteratively by explicitly conditioning on the previously generated proofs. Experiments on multiple synthetic, zero-shot, and human-paraphrased datasets reveal that both multiPRover models significantly outperform PRover on datasets containing multiple gold proofs. Iterative-multiPRover obtains state-of-the-art proof F1 in zero-shot scenarios where all examples have single correct proofs. It also generalizes better to questions requiring higher depths of reasoning where multiple proofs are more frequent.



multiPRover: Generating Multiple Proofs for Improved Interpretability in Rule Reasoning

Targeted syntactic evaluation of subject-verb number agreement in English (TSE) evaluates language models’ syntactic knowledge using hand-crafted minimal pairs of sentences that differ only in the main verb’s conjugation. The method evaluates whether language models rate each grammatical sentence as more likely than its ungrammatical counterpart. We identify two distinct goals for TSE. First, evaluating the systematicity of a language model’s syntactic knowledge: given a sentence, can it conjugate arbitrary verbs correctly? Second, evaluating a model’s likely behavior: given a sentence, does the model concentrate its probability mass on correctly conjugated verbs, even if only on a subset of the possible verbs? We argue that current implementations of TSE do not directly capture either of these goals, and propose new metrics to capture each goal separately. Under our metrics, we find that TSE overestimates systematicity of language models, but that models score up to 40% better on verbs that they predict are likely in context.


Refining Targeted Syntactic Evaluation of Language Models

Past research has demonstrated that large neural language models (LMs) 
encode surprising amounts of factual information: however, augmenting or modifying this information requires modifying a corpus and retraining, which is computationally expensive.
To address this problem, we develop a neural LM that includes an interpretable neuro-symbolic KB in the form of a ``fact memory''.
Each element of the fact memory is formed from a triple of vectors, where each vector corresponds to a KB entity or relation. Our LM improves performance on knowledge-intensive question-answering tasks, sometimes dramatically, including a 27 point increase in one setting of WebQuestionsSP over a state-of-the-art open-book model, despite using 5% of the parameters. Most interestingly, we demonstrate that the model can be modified, without \emph{any} re-training, by updating the fact memory. 


Adaptable and Interpretable Neural MemoryOver Symbolic Knowledge

Recent work has demonstrated the vulnerability of modern text classifiers to universal adversarial attacks, which are input-agnostic sequences of words added to text processed by classifiers. Despite being successful, the word sequences produced in such attacks are often ungrammatical and can be easily distinguished from natural text. We develop adversarial attacks that appear closer to natural English phrases and yet confuse classification systems when added to benign inputs. We leverage an adversarially regularized autoencoder to generate triggers and propose a gradient-based search that aims to maximize the downstream classifier’s prediction loss. Our attacks effectively reduce model accuracy on classification tasks while being less identifiable than prior models as per automatic detection metrics and human-subject studies. Our aim is to demonstrate that adversarial attacks can be made harder to detect than previously thought and to enable the development of appropriate defenses.


Universal Adversarial Attacks with Natural Triggers for Text Classification

Recent work has shown that fine-tuning large networks is surprisingly sensitive to changes in random seed(s). We explore the implications of this phenomenon for model fairness across demographic groups in clinical prediction tasks over electronic health records (EHR) in MIMIC-III ––– the standard dataset in clinical NLP research. Apparent subgroup performance varies substantially for seeds that yield similar overall performance, although there is no evidence of a trade-off between overall and subgroup performance. However, we also find that the small sample sizes inherent to looking at intersections of minority groups and somewhat rare conditions limit our ability to accurately estimate disparities. Further, we find that jointly optimizing for high overall performance and low disparities does not yield statistically significant improvements. Our results suggest that fairness work using MIMIC-III should carefully account for variations in apparent differences that may arise from stochasticity and small sample size


On the Impact of Random Seeds on the Fairness of Clinical Classifiers

Volatility prediction is complex due to the stock market's stochastic nature. Existing research focuses on the textual elements of financial disclosures like earnings calls transcripts to forecast stock volatility and risk, but ignores the rich acoustic features in the company executives' speech. Recently, new multimodal approaches that leverage the verbal and vocal cues of speakers in financial disclosures significantly outperform previous state-of-the-art approaches demonstrating the benefits of multimodality and speech. However, the financial realm is still plagued with a severe underrepresentation of various communities spanning diverse demographics, gender, and native speech. While multimodal models are better risk forecasters, it is imperative to also investigate the potential bias that these models may learn from the speech signals of company executives. In this work, we present the first study to discover the gender bias in multimodal volatility prediction due to gender-sensitive audio features and fewer female executives in earnings calls of one of the world's biggest stock indexes, the S\&P 500 index. We quantitatively analyze bias as error disparity and investigate the sources of this bias. Our results suggest that multimodal neural financial models accentuate gender-based stereotypes.


An Empirical Investigation of Bias in the Multimodal Analysis of Financial Earnings Calls

Recent work in natural language processing (NLP) has focused on ethical challenges such as understanding and mitigating bias in data and algorithms; identifying objectionable content like hate speech, stereotypes and offensive language; and building frameworks for better system design and data handling practices. However, there has been little discussion about the ethical foundations that underlie these efforts. In this work, we study one ethical theory, namely deontological ethics, from the perspective of NLP. In particular, we focus on the generalization principle and the respect for autonomy through informed consent. We provide four case studies to demonstrate how these principles can be used with NLP systems. We also recommend directions to avoid the ethical issues in these systems.


Case Study: Deontological Ethics in NLP

Fine-tuned language models have been shown to exhibit biases against protected groups in a host of modeling tasks such as text classification and coreference resolution. Previous works focus on detecting these biases, reducing bias in data representations, and using auxiliary training objectives to mitigate bias during fine-tuning. Although these techniques achieve bias reduction for the task and domain at hand, the effects of bias mitigation may not directly transfer to new tasks, requiring additional data collection and customized annotation of sensitive attributes, and re-evaluation of appropriate fairness metrics. We explore the feasibility and benefits of upstream bias mitigation (UBM) for reducing bias on downstream tasks, by first applying bias mitigation to an upstream model through fine-tuning and subsequently using it for downstream fine-tuning. We find, in extensive experiments across hate speech detection, toxicity detection, occupation prediction, and coreference resolution tasks over various bias factors, that the effects of UBM are indeed transferable to new downstream tasks or domains via fine-tuning, creating less biased downstream models than directly fine-tuning on the downstream task or transferring from a vanilla upstream model. Though challenges remain, we show that UBM promises more efficient and accessible bias mitigation in LM fine-tuning.


On Transferability of Bias Mitigation Effects in Language Model Fine-Tuning

Neural language models are known to have a high capacity for memorization of training samples. This may have serious privacy implications when training models on user content such as email correspondence. Differential privacy (DP), a popular choice to train models with privacy guarantees, comes with significant costs in terms of utility degradation and disparate impact on subgroups of users. In this work, we introduce two privacy-preserving regularization methods for training language models that enable joint optimization of utility and privacy through (1) the use of a discriminator and (2) the inclusion of a triplet-loss term. We compare our methods with DP through extensive evaluation. We show the advantages of our regularizers with favorable utility-privacy trade-off, faster training with the ability to tap into existing optimization approaches, and ensuring uniform treatment of under-represented subgroups.


Privacy Regularization: Joint Privacy-Utility Optimization in LanguageModels

When developing topic models, a critical question that should be asked is: How well will this model work in an applied setting? Because standard performance evaluation of topic interpretability uses automated measures modeled on human evaluation tests that are dissimilar to applied usage, these models’ generalizability remains in question. In this paper, we probe the issue of validity in topic model evaluation and assess how informative coherence measures are for specialized collections used in an applied setting. Informed by the literature, we propose four understandings of interpretability. We evaluate these using a novel experimental framework reflective of varied applied settings, including human evaluations using open labeling, typical of applied research. These evaluations show that for some specialized collections, standard coherence measures may not inform the most appropriate topic model or the optimal number of topics, and current interpretability performance validation methods are challenged as a means to confirm model quality in the absence of ground truth data.


Explaining Neural Network Predictions on Sentence Pairs via Learning Word-Group Masks

Downloads

Next from NAACL 2021

multiPRover: Generating Multiple Proofs for Improved Interpretability in Rule Reasoning

Similar lecture

When and Why a Model Fails? A Human-in-the-loop Error Detection Framework for Sentiment Analysis