United States

Robustness and counterfactual bias are usually evaluated on a test dataset. However, are these evaluations robust? If the test dataset is perturbed slightly, will the evaluation results keep the same? In this paper, we propose a &quot;double perturbation&quot; framework to uncover model weaknesses beyond the test dataset. The framework first perturbs the test dataset to construct abundant natural sentences similar to the test data, and then diagnoses the prediction change regarding a single-word substitution. We apply this framework to study two perturbation-based approaches that are used to analyze models&#39; robustness and counterfactual bias in English. (1) For robustness, we focus on synonym substitutions and identify vulnerable examples where prediction can be altered. Our proposed attack attains high success rates (96.0%-99.8%) in finding vulnerable examples on both original and robustly trained CNNs and Transformers. (2) For counterfactual bias, we focus on substituting demographic tokens (e.g., gender, race) and measure the shift of the expected prediction among constructed sentences. Our method is able to reveal the hidden model biases not directly shown in the test dataset. Our code is available at https://github.com/chong-z/nlp-second-order-attack.


NAACL 2021

Double Perturbation: On the Robustness of Robustness and Counterfactual Bias Evaluation

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>

Robustness and counterfactual bias are usually evaluated on a test dataset. However, are these evaluations robust? If the test dataset is perturbed slightly, will the evaluation results keep the same? In this paper, we propose a "double perturbation" framework to uncover model weaknesses beyond the test dataset. The framework first perturbs the test dataset to construct abundant natural sentences similar to the test data, and then diagnoses the prediction change regarding a single-word substitution. We apply this framework to study two perturbation-based approaches that are used to analyze models' robustness and counterfactual bias in English. (1) For robustness, we focus on synonym substitutions and identify vulnerable examples where prediction can be altered. Our proposed attack attains high success rates (96.0%-99.8%) in finding vulnerable examples on both original and robustly trained CNNs and Transformers. (2) For counterfactual bias, we focus on substituting demographic tokens (e.g., gender, race) and measure the shift of the expected prediction among constructed sentences. Our method is able to reveal the hidden model biases not directly shown in the test dataset. Our code is available at https://github.com/chong-z/nlp-second-order-attack.


technical paper

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.


Topic Model or Topic Twaddle? Re-evaluating Semantic Interpretability Measures

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.


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

Existing work on probing of pretrained language models (LMs) has predominantly focused on sentence-level syntactic tasks. In this paper, we introduce document-level discourse probing to evaluate the ability of pretrained LMs to capture document-level relations. We experiment with 7 pretrained LMs, 4 languages, and 7 discourse probing tasks, and find BART to be overall the best model at capturing discourse — but only in its encoder, with BERT performing surprisingly well as the baseline model. Across the different models, there are substantial differences in which layers best capture discourse information, and large disparities between models.


Discourse Probing of Pretrained Language Models

Improving model generalization on held-out data is one of the core objectives in commonsense reasoning.
Recent work has shown that models trained on the dataset with superficial cues tend to perform well on the easy test set with superficial cues but perform poorly on the hard test set without superficial cues.
Previous approaches have resorted to manual methods of encouraging models not to overfit to superficial cues.
While some of the methods have improved performance on hard instances, they also lead to degraded performance on easy instances.
Here, we propose to explicitly learn a model that does well on both the easy test set with superficial cues and hard test set without superficial cues.
Using a meta-learning objective, we learn such a model that improves performance on both the easy test set and the hard test set.
By evaluating our models on Choice of Plausible Alternatives (COPA) and Commonsense Explanation, we show that our proposed method leads to improved performance on both the easy test set and the hard test set upon which we observe up to 16.5 percentage points improvement over the baseline.


Double Perturbation: On the Robustness of Robustness and Counterfactual Bias Evaluation

Downloads

Next from NAACL 2021

Universal Adversarial Attacks with Natural Triggers for Text Classification

Similar lecture

Better Feature Integration for Named Entity Recognition