Dominican Republic

The Uniform Information Density principle states that speakers plan their utterances to reduce fluctuations in the density of the information transmitted. In this paper, we test whether, and within which contextual units this principle holds in task-oriented dialogues. We show that there is evidence supporting the principle in written dialogues where participants play a cooperative reference game as well as in spoken dialogues involving instruction giving and following. Our study underlines the importance of identifying the relevant contextual components, showing that information content increases particularly within topically and referentially related contextual units.

EMNLP 2021

Is Information Density Uniform in Task-Oriented Dialogues?

EMNLP 2021 is planned to be a hybrid event in Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, with both on-site and fully virtual participation possible. The experience for on-site participants would closely approximate a normal pre-COVID *ACL conference, with 5-6 thematically organized parallel sessions and live Q/A and interactive discussion immediately after the talks. Presentations by virtual participants will be equitably interleaved with those of on-site participants, projected on the auditorium screens as if on-site, and also followed immediately by live Q/A and interactive discussion at a time during reasonable waking hours for the virtual presenter. For all participants, on-site and virtual, who are unable to attend a session due to either time-zone issues or because they are participating in another session live, talk recordings and slides will be available online at a minimum after the live presentation (and in many cases before as well), and questions may be submitted in advance on session-specific discussion boards and answered live in session with the usual visual aids if desired.

<iframe style="width:700px;height:400px" src="https://online.fliphtml5.com/ebtyf/ceby/"  seamless="seamless" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" ></iframe>

Please Note: The EMNLP registration system is not currently connected to the underline site as we are still in the process of building out EMNLP 2021. You will receive access instructions from underline the week of November 1st. 

Access is given only to EMNLP upon registration, if you have not registered please do so [here](https://2021.emnlp.org/registration).

Registered attendees will receive access the week of November 1st.

EMNLP 2021 is planned to be a hybrid event in Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, with both on-site and fully virtual participation possible.

poster

Despite the widespread use of Knowledge Graph Embeddings (KGE), little is known about the security vulnerabilities that might disrupt their intended behaviour. We study data poisoning attacks against KGE models for link prediction. These attacks craft adversarial additions or deletions at training time to cause model failure at test time. To select adversarial deletions, we propose to use the model-agnostic instance attribution methods from Interpretable Machine Learning, which identify the training instances that are most influential to a neural model’s predictions on test instances. We use these influential triples as adversarial deletions. We further propose a heuristic method to replace one of the two entities in each influential triple to generate adversarial additions. Our experiments show that the proposed strategies outperform the state-of-art data poisoning attacks on KGE models and improve the MRR degradation due to the attacks by up to 62% over the baselines.

Adversarial Attacks on Knowledge Graph Embeddings via Instance Attribution Methods

Pre-trained LMs have shown impressive performance on downstream NLP tasks, but we have yet to establish a clear understanding of their sophistication when it comes to processing, retaining, and applying information presented in their input. In this paper we tackle a component of this question by examining robustness of models' ability to deploy relevant context information in the face of distracting content. We present models with cloze tasks requiring use of critical context information, and introduce distracting content to test how robustly the models retain and use that critical information for prediction. We also systematically manipulate the nature of these distractors, to shed light on dynamics of models' use of contextual cues. We find that although models appear in simple contexts to make predictions based on understanding and applying relevant facts from prior context, the presence of distracting but irrelevant content has clear impact in confusing model predictions. In particular, models appear particularly susceptible to factors of semantic similarity and word position. The findings are consistent with the conclusion that LM predictions are driven in large part by superficial contextual cues, rather than by robust representations of context meaning.

Sorting through the noise: Testing robustness of information processing in pre-trained language models

I highlight a simple failure mode of state-of- the-art machine reading systems: when contexts do not align with commonly shared beliefs. For example, machine reading systems fail to answer "What did Elizabeth want?" correctly in the context of ’My kingdom for a cough drop, cried Queen Elizabeth.’ Biased by co-occurrence statistics in the training data of pretrained language models, systems predict 'my kingdom', rather than 'a cough drop'. I argue such biases are analogous to human belief biases and present a carefully designed challenge dataset for English machine reading, called AUTO-LOCKE, to quantify such effects. Evaluations of machine reading systems on AUTO-LOCKE show the pervasiveness of be- lief bias in machine reading.

Locke's Holiday: Belief Bias in Machine Reading

Transformer-based sequence-to-sequence architectures, while achieving state-of-the-art results on a large number of NLP tasks, can still suffer from overfitting during training. In practice, this is usually countered either by applying regularization methods (e.g. dropout, L2-regularization) or by providing huge amounts of training data. Additionally, Transformer and other architectures are known to struggle when generating very long sequences. For example, in machine translation, the neural-based systems perform worse on very long sequences when compared to the preceding phrase-based translation approaches (Koehn and Knowles, 2017). We present results which suggest that the issue might also be in the mismatch between the length distributions of the training and validation data combined with the aforementioned tendency of the neural networks to overfit to the training data. We demonstrate on a simple string editing task and a machine translation task that the Transformer model performance drops significantly when facing sequences of length diverging from the length distribution in the training data. Additionally, we show that the observed drop in performance is due to the hypothesis length corresponding to the lengths seen by the model during training rather than the length of the input sequence.

Sequence Length is a Domain: Length-based Overfitting in Transformer Models

Contrastive explanations clarify why an event occurred in contrast to another. They are more inherently intuitive to humans to both produce and comprehend. We propose a methodology to produce contrastive explanations for classification models by modifying the representation to disregard non-contrastive information, and modifying model behavior to only be based on contrastive reasoning. Our method is based on projecting model representation to a latent space that captures only the features that are useful (to the model) to differentiate two potential decisions. We demonstrate the value of contrastive explanations by analyzing two different scenarios, using both high-level abstract concept attribution and low-level input token/span attribution, on two widely used text classification tasks. Specifically, we produce explanations for answering: for which label, and against which alternative label, is some aspect of the input useful? And which aspects of the input are useful for and against particular decisions? Overall, our findings shed light on the ability of label-contrastive explanations to provide a more accurate and finer-grained interpretability of a model's decision.

Contrastive Explanations for Model Interpretability

Research shows that natural language processing models are generally considered to be vulnerable to adversarial attacks; but recent work has drawn attention to the issue of validating these adversarial inputs against certain criteria (e.g., the preservation of semantics and grammaticality). Enforcing constraints to uphold such criteria may render attacks unsuccessful, raising the question of whether valid attacks are actually feasible. In this work, we investigate this through the lens of human language ability. We report on crowdsourcing studies in which we task humans with iteratively modifying words in an input text, while receiving immediate model feedback, with the aim of causing a sentiment classification model to misclassify the example. Our findings suggest that humans are capable of generating a substantial amount of adversarial examples using semantics-preserving word substitutions. We analyze how human-generated adversarial examples compare to the recently proposed TextFooler, Genetic, BAE and SememePSO attack algorithms on the dimensions naturalness, preservation of sentiment, grammaticality and substitution rate. Our findings suggest that human-generated adversarial examples are not more able than the best algorithms to generate natural-reading, sentiment-preserving examples, though they do so by being much more computationally efficient.

Contrasting Human- and Machine-Generated Word-Level Adversarial Examples for Text Classification

State-of-the-art contextual embeddings are obtained from large language models available only for a few languages. For others, we need to learn representations using a multilingual model. There is an ongoing debate on whether multilingual embeddings can be aligned in a space shared across many languages. The novel Orthogonal Structural Probe (Limisiewicz and Mareček, 2021) allows us to answer this question for specific linguistic features and learn a projection based only on mono-lingual annotated datasets. We evaluate syntactic (UD) and lexical (WordNet) structural information encoded inmBERT's contextual representations for nine diverse languages. We observe that for languages closely related to English, no transformation is needed. The evaluated information is encoded in a shared cross-lingual embedding space. For other languages, it is beneficial to apply orthogonal transformation learned separately for each language. We successfully apply our findings to zero-shot and few-shot cross-lingual parsing.

Examining Cross-lingual Contextual Embeddings with Orthogonal Structural Probes

We present a method for exploring regions around individual points in a contextualized vector space (particularly, BERT space), as a way to investigate how these regions correspond to word senses. In order to do so, we extend the domain of BERT to include any input embedding (not only those in its vocabulary), and study BERT as a continuous function. By inducing a contextualized “pseudoword'' as a stand-in for a static embedding in the input layer, and then performing masked prediction of a word in the sentence, we are able to investigate the geometry of the BERT-space in a controlled manner around individual instances. Using our method on a set of carefully constructed sentences targeting ambiguous English words, we find substantial regularity in the contextualized space, with regions that correspond to distinct word senses; but between these regions there are occasionally “sense voids''---regions that do not correspond to any intelligible sense.

Putting Words in BERT's Mouth: Navigating Contextualized Vector Spaces with Pseudowords

In order to preserve word-order information in a non-autoregressive setting, transformer architectures tend to include positional knowledge, by (for instance) adding positional encodings to token embeddings. Several modifications have been proposed over the sinusoidal positional encodings used in the original transformer architecture; these include, for instance, separating position encodings and token embeddings, or directly modifying attention weights based on the distance between word pairs. We first show that surprisingly, while these modifications tend to improve monolingual language models, none of them result in better multilingual language models. We then answer why that is: Sinusoidal encodings were explicitly designed to facilitate compositionality by allowing linear projections over arbitrary time steps. Higher variances in multilingual training distributions requires higher compression, in which case, compositionality becomes indispensable. Learned absolute positional encodings (e.g., in mBERT) tend to approximate sinusoidal embeddings in multilingual settings, but more complex positional encoding architectures lack the inductive bias to effectively learn compositionality and cross-lingual alignment. In other words, while sinusoidal positional encodings were originally designed for monolingual applications, they are particularly useful in multilingual language models.

The Impact of Positional Encodings on Multilingual Compression

We find that the requirement of model interpretations to be faithful is vague and incomplete. With interpretation by textual highlights as a case-study, we present several failure cases. Borrowing concepts from social science, we identify that the problem is a misalignment between the causal chain of decisions (causal attribution) and the attribution of human behavior to the interpretation (social attribution). We re-formulate faithfulness as an accurate attribution of causality to the model, and introduce the concept of aligned faithfulness: faithful causal chains that are aligned with their expected social behavior. The two steps of causal attribution and social attribution together complete the process of explaining behavior. With this formalization, we characterize various failures of misaligned faithful highlight interpretations, and propose an alternative causal chain to remedy the issues. Finally, we implement highlight explanations of the proposed causal format using contrastive explanations.

Is Information Density Uniform in Task-Oriented Dialogues?

Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2021

Adversarial Attacks on Knowledge Graph Embeddings via Instance Attribution Methods

Similar lecture

Analyzing the Surprising Variability in Word Embedding Stability Across Languages