Dominican Republic

While day-to-day questions come with a variety of answer types, the current question-answering (QA) literature has failed to adequately address the answer diversity of questions. To this end, we present GooAQ, a large-scale dataset with a variety of answer types. This dataset contains over 5 million questions and 3 million answers collected from Google. GooAQ questions are collected semi-automatically from the Google search engine using its autocomplete feature. This results in naturalistic questions of practical interest that are nonetheless short and expressed using simple language. GooAQ answers are mined from Google&#39;s responses to our collected questions, specifically from the answer boxes in the search results. This yields a rich space of answer types, containing both textual answers (short and long) as well as more structured ones such as collections. We benchmarkT5 models on GooAQ and observe that: (a) in line with recent work, LM&#39;s strong performance on GooAQ&#39;s short-answer questions heavily benefit from annotated data; however, (b) their quality in generating coherent and accurate responses for questions requiring long responses (such as &#39;how&#39; and &#39;why&#39; questions) is less reliant on observing annotated data and mainly supported by their pre-training. We release GooAQ to facilitate further research on improving QA with diverse response types.

EMNLP 2021

GooAQ: Open Question Answering with Diverse Answer Types

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.

While day-to-day questions come with a variety of answer types, the current question-answering (QA) literature has failed to adequately address the answer diversity of questions. To this end, we present GooAQ, a large-scale dataset with a variety of answer types. This dataset contains over 5 million questions and 3 million answers collected from Google. GooAQ questions are collected semi-automatically from the Google search engine using its autocomplete feature. This results in naturalistic questions of practical interest that are nonetheless short and expressed using simple language. GooAQ answers are mined from Google's responses to our collected questions, specifically from the answer boxes in the search results. This yields a rich space of answer types, containing both textual answers (short and long) as well as more structured ones such as collections. We benchmarkT5 models on GooAQ and observe that: (a) in line with recent work, LM's strong performance on GooAQ's short-answer questions heavily benefit from annotated data; however, (b) their quality in generating coherent and accurate responses for questions requiring long responses (such as 'how' and 'why' questions) is less reliant on observing annotated data and mainly supported by their pre-training. We release GooAQ to facilitate further research on improving QA with diverse response types.

workshop paper

Estimating the expected output quality of generation systems is central to NLG. This paper qualifies the notion that automatic metrics are not as good as humans in estimating system-level quality. Statistically, humans are unbiased, high variance estimators, while metrics are biased, low variance estimators. We compare these estimators by their error in pairwise prediction (which generation system is better?) using the bootstrap. Measuring this error is complicated: predictions are evaluated against noisy, human predicted labels instead of the ground truth, and metric predictions fluctuate based on the test sets they were calculated on. By applying a bias-variance-noise decomposition, we adjust this error to a noise-free, infinite test set setting. Our analysis compares the adjusted error of metrics to humans and a derived, perfect segment-level annotator, both of which are unbiased estimators dependent on the number of judgments collected. In MT, we identify two settings where metrics outperform humans due to a statistical advantage in variance: when the number of human judgments used is small, and when the quality difference between compared systems is small.

The statistical advantage of automatic NLG metrics at the system level

Standard accuracy metrics have shown that Math Word Problem (MWP) solvers have achieved high performance on benchmark datasets. However, the extent to which existing MWP solvers truly understand language and its relation with numbers is still unclear. In this paper, we generate adversarial attacks to evaluate the robustness of state-of-the-art MWP solvers. We propose two methods Question Reordering and Sentence Paraphrasing to generate adversarial attacks. We conduct experiments across three neural MWP solvers over two benchmark datasets. On average, our attack method is able to reduce the accuracy of MWP solvers by over 40 percentage points on these datasets. Our results demonstrate that existing MWP solvers are sensitive to linguistic variations in the problem text. We verify the validity and quality of generated adversarial examples through human evaluation.

Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Math Word Problem Solvers

While powerful pre-trained language models have improved the fluency of text generation models, it remains difficult to ensure that the generated texts are semantically faithful to the input. In this paper, we introduce a novel automatic evaluation metric, Entity-Based Semantic Adequacy, which can be used to assess to what extent generation models that verbalise RDF (Resource Description Framework) graphs produce text that contains mentions of the entities occurring in the RDF input. This is important as RDF subject and object entities make up 2/3 of the input. We use our metric to compare 25 models from the WebNLG Shared Tasks and we examine correlation with results from human evaluations of semantic adequacy.
We show that while our metric correlates with human evaluation scores,
this correlation varies with the specifics of the human evaluation setup. This suggests that in order to measure the entity-based adequacy of generated texts, an automatic metric such as the one proposed here might be more reliable, as less subjective and more focused on correct verbalisation of the input, than human evaluation measures.

Entity-Based Semantic Adequacy for Data-to-Text Generation

There is an increasing interest in continuous learning (CL), as data privacy is becoming a priority for real-world machine learning applications. Meanwhile, there is still a lack of academic NLP benchmarks that are applicable for realistic CL settings, which is a major challenge for the advancement of the field. In
this paper we discuss some of the unrealistic data characteristics of public datasets, study the challenges of realistic single-task continuous learning as well as the effectiveness of data rehearsal as a way to mitigate accuracy loss. We construct a CL NER dataset from an existing publicly available dataset and release it along with the code to the research community.

Towards Realistic Single-Task Continuous Learning Research for NER

In the last few years, several methods have been proposed to build meta-embeddings. The general aim was to obtain new representations integrating complementary knowledge from different source pre-trained embeddings thereby improving their overall quality. However, previous meta-embeddings have been evaluated using a variety of methods and datasets, which makes it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions regarding the merits of each approach. In this paper we propose a unified common framework, including both intrinsic and extrinsic tasks, for a fair and objective meta-embeddings evaluation. Furthermore, we present a new method to generate meta-embeddings, outperforming previous work on a large number of intrinsic evaluation benchmarks. Our evaluation framework also allows us to conclude that previous extrinsic evaluations of meta-embeddings have been overestimated.

Benchmarking Meta-embeddings: What Works and What Does Not

Learning sentence embeddings often requires a large amount of labeled data. However, for most tasks and domains, labeled data is seldom available and creating it is expensive. In this work, we present a new state-of-the-art unsupervised method based on pre-trained Transformers and Sequential Denoising Auto-Encoder (TSDAE) which outperforms previous approaches by up to 6.4 points. It can achieve up to 93.1% of the performance of in-domain supervised approaches. Further, we show that TSDAE is a strong domain adaptation and pre-training method for sentence embeddings, significantly outperforming other approaches like Masked Language Model.
A crucial shortcoming of previous studies is the narrow evaluation: Most work mainly evaluates on the single task of Semantic Textual Similarity (STS), which does not require any domain knowledge. It is unclear if these proposed methods generalize to other domains and tasks. We fill this gap and evaluate TSDAE and other recent approaches on four different datasets from heterogeneous domains.

TSDAE: Using Transformer-based Sequential Denoising Auto-Encoder for Unsupervised Sentence Embedding Learning

Coreference Resolution is an important NLP task and most state-of-the-art methods rely on word embeddings for word representation. However, one issue that has been largely overlooked in literature is that of comparing the performance of different embeddings across and within families in this task. 
Therefore, we frame our study in the context of Event and Entity Coreference Resolution (EvCR \& EnCR), and address two questions : 
1) Is there a trade-off between performance (predictive \& run-time) and embedding size? 
2) How do the embeddings' performance compare within and across families?
Our experiments reveal several interesting findings. 
First, we observe diminishing returns in performance with respect to embedding size. 
E.g. a model using solely a character embedding achieves 86\% of the performance of the largest model (Elmo, GloVe, Character) while being 1.2\% of its size. 
Second, the larger model using multiple embeddings learns faster overall despite being slower per epoch. 
However, it is still slower at test time.
Finally, Elmo performs best on both EvCR and EnCR, while GloVe and FastText perform best in EvCR and EnCR respectively.

A Comprehensive Comparison of Word Embeddings in Event & Entity Coreference Resolution.

Recent progress in generative language models has enabled machines to generate astonishingly realistic texts. While there are many legitimate applications of such models, there is also a rising need to distinguish machine-generated texts from human-written ones (e.g., fake news detection). However, to our best knowledge, there is currently no benchmark environment with datasets and tasks to systematically study the so-called "Turing Test" problem for neural text generation methods. In this work, we present the TuringBench benchmark environment, which is comprised of (1) a dataset with 200K human- or machine-generated samples across 20 labels {Human, GPT-1, GPT-2_small, GPT-2_medium, GPT-2_large, GPT-2_xl, GPT-2_PyTorch, GPT-3, GROVER_base, GROVER_large, GROVER_mega, CTRL, XLM, XLNET_base, XLNET_large, FAIR_wmt19, FAIR_wmt20, TRANSFORMER_XL, PPLM_distil, PPLM_gpt2}, (2) two benchmark tasks -- i.e., Turing Test (TT) and Authorship Attribution (AA), and (3) a website with leaderboards. Our preliminary experimental results using TuringBench show that FAIR_wmt20 and GPT-3 are the current winners, among all language models tested, in generating the most human-like indistinguishable texts with the lowest F1 score by five state-of-the-art TT detection models. The TuringBench is available at: https://turingbench.ist.psu.edu/

TuringBench: A Benchmark Environment for Turing Test in the Age of Neural Text Generation

Data-driven subword segmentation has become the default strategy for open-vocabulary machine translation and other NLP tasks, but may not be sufficiently generic for optimal learning of non-concatenative morphology. We design a test suite to evaluate segmentation strategies on different types of morphological phenomena in a controlled, semi-synthetic setting. In our experiments, we compare how well machine translation models trained on subword- and character-level can translate these morphological phenomena. We find that learning to analyse and generate morphologically complex surface representations is still challenging, especially for non-concatenative morphological phenomena like reduplication or vowel harmony and for rare word stems. Based on our results, we recommend that novel text representation strategies be tested on a range of typologically diverse languages to minimise the risk of adopting a strategy that inadvertently disadvantages certain languages.

How Suitable Are Subword Segmentation Strategies for Translating Non-Concatenative Morphology?

Research in NLP is often supported by experimental results, and improved reporting of such results can lead to better understanding and more reproducible science. In this paper we analyze three statistical estimators for expected validation performance, a tool used for reporting performance (e.g., accuracy) as a function of computational budget (e.g., number of hyperparameter tuning experiments). Where previous work analyzing such estimators focused on the bias, we also examine the variance and mean squared error (MSE). In both synthetic and realistic scenarios, we evaluate three estimators and find the unbiased estimator has the highest variance, and the estimator with the smallest variance has the largest bias; the estimator with the smallest MSE strikes a balance between bias and variance, displaying a classic bias-variance tradeoff. We use expected validation performance to compare between different models, and analyze how frequently each estimator leads to drawing incorrect conclusions about which of two models performs best. We find that the two biased estimators lead to the fewest incorrect conclusions, which hints at the importance of minimizing variance and MSE.

GooAQ: Open Question Answering with Diverse Answer Types

Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2021

The statistical advantage of automatic NLG metrics at the system level

Similar lecture

How Can We Know When Language Models Know? On the Calibration of Language Models for Question Answering

GooAQ: Open Question Answering with Diverse Answer Types

.css-70qvj9{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2021

The statistical advantage of automatic NLG metrics at the system level

Similar lecture

How Can We Know When Language Models Know? On the Calibration of Language Models for Question Answering

Downloads