Ireland

We introduce a large-scale dataset for automatic release note generation and propose two classwise summarization methods, which are more effective than previous systems.

ACL 2022

RNSum: A Large-Scale Dataset for Automatic Release Note Generation via Commit Logs Summarization

abstractive

extractive

summarization

## Welcome to EMNLP 2022!
I am delighted to welcome you to EMNLP 2022! I believe this conference has been complicated beyond any precedent. Over the past year, it’s been thrilling to see the organization team approach each new puzzle with creativity and enthusiasm. We hope that those participating in Abu Dhabi as well as those joining remotely will leave the conference feeling newly inspired by the program and newly connected to our ever-growing community. Following EMNLP 2021 and major NLP conferences since, EMNLP 2022 is “hybrid,” serving both virtual and in-person participants.

Our key innovations for EMNLP 2022 include:

* EMNLP 2022 is “hybrid” in a second sense, as well: we allowed both direct and rolling review paper submissions, building on the pilot experiment of EMNLP 2021, which considered a small number of ARR submissions. 
* Familiar from NAACL but new to EMNLP, we’ve added an industry track.
* During the conference, “portals” will link virtual poster sessions to in-person conference participants during poster sessions each day.
* The first ACL-family conference in the United Arab Emirates.

 *Message from Noah A. Smith, University of Washington and Allen Institute for AI, Seattle, Washington, USA* 
***EMNLP 2022 General Chair***
 
[![](https://assets.underline.io/uploads/markdown_image/1/image/9eec7d4a287ee18c278b08229290aa83.png)](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OlPv6QBeo62VVTughj2jkiLeyHd1WnUt/view)
 
[![](https://assets.underline.io/uploads/markdown_image/1/image/a3db7a768409f05192210d98601edb25.png)](https://emnlp2022.rocket.chat/)

To access this site you need to register. Please register [here](https://2022.emnlp.org/registration/).

Register here

EMNLP 2022

Welcome!
EMNLP 2022 will take place in Abu Dhabi from December 7th to December 11th, 2022. And it will be held in hybrid mode, both online and offline.

poster

# Welcome everyone to ACL 2022!

The 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics is taking place May 22-27, 2022 as a hybrid event, in Dublin and online. We are happy to welcome all of you to this anniversary edition with an almost 50-50 in-person and virtual participation. 
The main conference program features oral presentations, in-person and virtual posters and demo sessions, a plenary session for our best paper presentations and awards, three amazing keynote events and two new initiatives of invited talks: Spotlight Talks for Young Rising Stars (STIRS) and The Next Big Idea Talks. Posters (including Findings of ACL 2022) and demos are grouped by areas for both the in-person and the virtual sessions. For the virtual component, the talks will be on Zoom and the posters and the demos will be in GatherTown. The Student Research Workshop will have an oral session and a poster session as part of Poster Session 1. The program also features eight Tutorials and 28 Workshops. 

 
We wish you a wonderful conference! 
[**The ACL 2022 Organizing Committee**](https://www.2022.aclweb.org/organisers)
 
[**Conference Handbook**](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_BUCMfhMVrjG9E2e71aHdHeE28KSje0l/view?usp=sharing) 
[**Mini Handbook**](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qlBKl0wzmlVF1oCeMQl3BahLd9nLP5Ce/view?usp=sharing) 
[**Posters and Demo guides**](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UucMAoCNncIOaH1rMMDa0owuG9qgvJTG/view?usp=sharing)

The Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) is the premier international scientific and professional society for people working on computational problems involving human language, a field often referred to as either computational linguistics or natural language processing (NLP). 

Task-oriented dialogue systems are increasingly prevalent in healthcare settings, and have been characterized by a diverse range of architectures and objectives. Although these systems have been surveyed in the medical community from a non-technical perspective, a systematic review from a rigorous computational perspective has to date remained noticeably absent. As a result, many important
implementation details of healthcare-oriented dialogue systems remain limited or underspecified, slowing the pace of innovation in this area. To fill this gap, we investigated an initial pool of 4070 papers from well-known computer science, natural language processing, and artificial intelligence venues, identifying 70 papers discussing the system-level implementation of task-oriented dialogue systems for healthcare applications. We conducted a comprehensive technical review of
these papers, and present our key findings including identified gaps and corresponding recommendations.

The AI Doctor Is In: A Survey of Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems for Healthcare Applications

Knowledge base (KB) embeddings have been shown to contain gender biases (Fisher et al., 2020b). In this paper, we study two questions regarding these biases: how to quantify them, and how to trace their origins in KB? Specifically, first, we develop two novel bias measures respectively for a group of person entities and an individual person entity. Evidence of their validity is observed by comparison with real-world census data. Second, we use influence function to inspect the contribution of each triple in KB to the overall group bias. To exemplify the potential applications of our study, we also present two strategies (by adding and removing KB triples) to mitigate gender biases in KB embeddings.

Understanding Gender Bias in Knowledge Base Embeddings

Recent studies have shown that language models pretrained and/or fine-tuned on randomly permuted sentences exhibit competitive performance on GLUE, putting into question the importance of word order information. Somewhat counter-intuitively, some of these studies also report that position embeddings appear to be crucial for models' good performance with shuffled text. We probe these language models for word order information and investigate what position embeddings learned from shuffled text encode, showing that these models retain a notion of word order information. We show this is in part due to a subtlety in how shuffling is implemented in previous work -- before rather than after subword segmentation. Surprisingly, we find even Language models trained on text shuffled after subword segmentation retain some semblance of information about word order because of the statistical dependencies between sentence length and unigram probabilities. Finally, we show that beyond GLUE, a variety of language understanding tasks do require word order information, often to an extent that cannot be learned through fine-tuning.

Word Order Does Matter and Shuffled Language Models Know It

A key challenge facing natural language interfaces is enabling users to understand the capabilities of the underlying system. We propose a novel approach for generating explanations of a natural language interface based on semantic parsing. We focus on counterfactual explanations, which are post-hoc explanations that describe to the user how they could have minimally modified their utterance to achieve their desired goal. In particular, the user provides an utterance along with a demonstration of their desired goal; then, our algorithm synthesizes a paraphrase of their utterance that is guaranteed to achieve their goal. In two user studies, we demonstrate that our approach substantially improves user performance, and that it generates explanations that more closely match the user's intent compared to two ablations.

Counterfactual Explanations for Natural Language Interfaces

Pretrained language models are typically trained on massive web-based datasets, which are often “contaminated” with downstream test sets. It is not clear to what extent models exploit the contaminated data for downstream tasks. We present a principled method to study this question. We pretrain BERT models on joint corpora of Wikipedia and labeled downstream datasets, and fine-tune them on the relevant task. Comparing performance between samples seen and unseen during pretraining enables us to define and quantify levels of memorization and exploitation. Experiments with two models and three downstream tasks show that exploitation exists in some cases, but in others the models memorize the contaminated data, but do not exploit it. We show that these two measures are affected by different factors such as the number of duplications of the contaminated data and the model size. Our results highlight the importance of analyzing massive web-scale datasets to verify that progress in NLP is obtained by better language understanding and not better data exploitation.

Data Contamination: From Memorization to Exploitation

As privacy gains traction in the NLP community, researchers have started adopting various approaches to privacy-preserving methods. One of the favorite privacy frameworks, differential privacy (DP), is perhaps the most compelling thanks to its fundamental theoretical guarantees. Despite the apparent simplicity of the general concept of differential privacy, it seems non-trivial to get it right when applying it to NLP. In this short paper, we formally analyze several recent NLP papers proposing text representation learning using DPText (Beigi et al., 2019a,b; Alnasser et al., 2021; Beigi et al., 2021) and reveal their false claims of being differentially private. Furthermore, we also show a simple yet general empirical sanity check to determine whether a given implementation of a DP mechanism almost certainly violates the privacy loss guarantees. Our main goal is to raise awareness and help the community understand potential pitfalls of applying differential privacy to text representation learning.

How reparametrization trick broke differentially-private text representation learning

It has become crucial to develop tools for automated hate speech and abuse detection. These tools would help to stop the bullies and the haters and provide a safer environment for individuals especially from marginalized groups to freely express themselves. However, recent research shows that machine learning models are biased and they might make the right decisions for the wrong reasons. In this thesis, I set out to understand the performance of hate speech and abuse detection models and the different biases that could influence them. I show that hate speech and abuse detection models are not only subject to social bias but also to other types of bias that have not been explored before. Finally, I investigate the causal effect of the social and intersectional bias on the performance and unfairness of hate speech detection models.

 Darkness can not drive out darkness: Investigating Bias in Hate SpeechDetection Models

We propose a novel framework for cross-lingual content flagging with limited target-language data, which significantly outperforms prior work in terms of predictive performance. The framework is based on a nearest-neighbour architecture. It is a modern instantiation of the vanilla k-nearest neighbour model, as we use Transformer representations in all its components. Our framework can adapt to new source-language instances, without the need to be retrained from scratch. Unlike prior work on neighbourhood-based approaches, we encode the neighbourhood information based on query--neighbour interactions. We propose two encoding schemes and we show their effectiveness using both qualitative and quantitative analysis. Our evaluation results on eight languages from two different datasets for abusive language detection show sizable improvements of up to 9.5 F1 points absolute (for Italian) over strong baselines. On average, we achieve 3.6 absolute F1 points of improvement for the three languages in the Jigsaw Multilingual dataset and 2.14 points for the WUL dataset.

A Neighbourhood Framework for Resource-Lean Content Flagging

Fact-checking has become increasingly important due to the speed with which both information and misinformation can spread in the modern media ecosystem. Therefore, researchers have been exploring how fact-checking can be automated, using techniques based on natural language processing, machine learning, knowledge representation, and databases to automatically predict the veracity of claims. In this paper, we survey automated fact-checking stemming from natural language processing, and discuss its connections to related tasks and disciplines. In this process, we present an overview of existing datasets and models, aiming to unify the various definitions given and identify common concepts. Finally, we highlight challenges for future research.

A Survey on Automated Fact-Checking

We investigate how neural language models acquire individual words during training, extracting learning curves and ages of acquisition for over 600 words on the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventory (Fenson et al., 2007). Drawing on studies of word acquisition in children, we evaluate multiple predictors for words' ages of acquisition in LSTMs, BERT, and GPT-2. We find that the effects of concreteness, word length, and lexical class are pointedly different in children and language models, reinforcing the importance of interaction and sensorimotor experience in child language acquisition. Language models rely far more on word frequency than children, but like children, they exhibit slower learning of words in longer utterances. Interestingly, models follow consistent patterns during training for both unidirectional and bidirectional models, and for both LSTM and Transformer architectures. Models predict based on unigram token frequencies early in training, before transitioning loosely to bigram probabilities, eventually converging on more nuanced predictions. These results shed light on the role of distributional learning mechanisms in children, while also providing insights for more human-like language acquisition in language models.

Downloads

Next from ACL 2022

The AI Doctor Is In: A Survey of Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems for Healthcare Applications

Similar lecture

Are Abstractive Summarization Models truly `Abstractive'? An Empirical Study to Compare the two Forms of Summarization