Croatia

Annotators&#39; disagreement in linguistic data has been recently the focus of multiple initiatives aimed at raising awareness on issues related to `majority voting&#39; when aggregating diverging annotations. Disagreement can indeed reflect different aspects of linguistic annotation, from annotators&#39; subjectivity to sloppiness or lack of enough context to interpret a text. 
In this work we first propose a taxonomy of possible reasons leading to annotators&#39; disagreement in subjective tasks. Then, we manually label part of a Twitter dataset for offensive language detection in English following this taxonomy, identifying how the different categories are distributed. Finally we run a set of experiments aimed at assessing the impact of the different types of disagreement on classification performance. In particular, we investigate how accurately tweets belonging to different categories of disagreement can be classified as offensive or not, and how injecting data with different types of disagreement in the training set affects performance. We also perform offensive language detection as a multi-task framework, using disagreement classification as an auxiliary task.

EACL 2023

Why Don&#39;t You Do It Right? Analysing Annotators&#39; Disagreement in Subjective Tasks

taxonomy

classification

disagreement

Annotators' disagreement in linguistic data has been recently the focus of multiple initiatives aimed at raising awareness on issues related to `majority voting' when aggregating diverging annotations. Disagreement can indeed reflect different aspects of linguistic annotation, from annotators' subjectivity to sloppiness or lack of enough context to interpret a text. 
In this work we first propose a taxonomy of possible reasons leading to annotators' disagreement in subjective tasks. Then, we manually label part of a Twitter dataset for offensive language detection in English following this taxonomy, identifying how the different categories are distributed. Finally we run a set of experiments aimed at assessing the impact of the different types of disagreement on classification performance. In particular, we investigate how accurately tweets belonging to different categories of disagreement can be classified as offensive or not, and how injecting data with different types of disagreement in the training set affects performance. We also perform offensive language detection as a multi-task framework, using disagreement classification as an auxiliary task.

Why Don't You Do It Right? Analysing Annotators' Disagreement in Subjective Tasks

poster

### Welcome to the 17th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL) 
Continuing its mission of expanding and involving the science community of all European countries, EACL had selected the Ukrainian community for the 16th EACL, which took place online due to the COVID pandemic. Unfortunately, the ongoing war made the organisation in Kyiv impossible. Considering the importance of physical interaction among researchers, especially after the restrictions imposed by the COVID pandemic, in addition to an online mode, the conference will be held in Dubrovnik, Croatia, from 2 to 6 of May, 2023. The original aim of strengthening the connection with the Ukrainian community will not change as our program will feature a dedicated session and a workshop to highlight work on Ukrainian language technologies. As the flagship European conference in the field of computational linguistics, EACL welcomes European and international researchers covering a broad spectrum of research areas that are concerned with computational approaches to natural language.

You need to register for the conference in order to access this site. Please visit https://2023.eacl.org/registration for more information.

As the flagship European conference in the field of computational linguistics, EACL welcomes European and international researchers covering a broad spectrum of research areas that are concerned with computational approaches to natural language.

Previous studies have introduced a weakly-supervised paradigm for solving math word problems requiring only the answer value annotation. While these methods search for correct value equation candidates as pseudo labels, they search among a narrow sub-space of the enormous equation space. To address this problem, we propose a novel search algorithm with combinatorial strategy ComSearch, which can compress the search space by excluding mathematically equivalent equations. The compression allows the searching algorithm to enumerate all possible equations and obtain high-quality data. 
We investigate the noise in the pseudo labels that hold wrong mathematical logic, which we refer to as the false-matching problem, and propose a ranking model to denoise the pseudo labels. Our approach holds a flexible framework to utilize two existing supervised math word problem solvers to train pseudo labels, and both achieve state-of-the-art performance in the weak supervision task.

ComSearch: Equation Searching with Combinatorial Strategy for Solving Math Word Problems with Weak Supervision

Large pre-trained language models such as BERT have been widely used as a framework for natural language understanding (NLU) tasks. However, recent findings have revealed that pre-trained language models are insensitive to word order. The performance on NLU tasks remains unchanged even after randomly permuting the word of a sentence, where crucial syntactic information is destroyed. To help preserve the importance of word order, we propose a simple approach called Forced Invalidation (FI): forcing the model to identify permuted sequences as invalid samples. We perform an extensive evaluation of our approach on various English NLU and QA based tasks over BERT-based and attention-based models over word embeddings. Our experiments demonstrate that FI significantly improves the sensitivity of the models to word order.

Towards preserving word order importance through Forced Invalidation

Generics express generalizations about the world (e.g., birds can fly)
that are not universally true (e.g., newborn birds and penguins cannot fly). Commonsense knowledge bases, used extensively in NLP, encode some generic knowledge but rarely enumerate such exceptions and
knowing when a generic statement holds or does not hold true is crucial for developing a comprehensive understanding of generics.
We present a novel framework informed by linguistic theory to generate exemplars---specific cases when a generic holds true or false.
We generate \textasciitilde{}19k exemplars for \textasciitilde{}650 generics and show that our framework outperforms a strong GPT-3 baseline by 12.8 precision points.
Our analysis highlights the importance of
linguistic theory-based controllability for generating exemplars, the insufficiency of knowledge bases as a source of exemplars, and the challenges exemplars pose for the
task of natural language inference.

Penguins Don't Fly: Reasoning about Generics through Instantiations and Exceptions

There has been a surge of interest regarding the alignment of large-scale language models with human language comprehension behaviour. The majority of this research investigates comprehension behaviours from reading isolated, written sentences. We propose studying the perception of dialogue, focusing on an intrinsic form of language use: spoken conversations. 

Using the task of predicting upcoming dialogue turns, we ask whether turn plausibility scores produced by state-of-the-art language models correlate with human judgements. We find a strong correlation for some but not all models: masked language models produce stronger correlations than auto-regressive models. In doing so, we quantify human performance on the response selection task for open-domain spoken conversation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first such quantification.

We find that response selection performance can be used as a coarse proxy for the strength of correlation with human judgements, however humans and models make different response selection mistakes. The model which produces the strongest correlation also outperforms human response selection performance. Through ablation studies, we show that pre-trained language models provide a useful basis for turn representations; however, fine-grained contextualisation, inclusion of dialogue structure information, and fine-tuning towards response selection all boost response selection accuracy by over 30 absolute points.

Do dialogue representations align with perception? An empirical study

Large pre-trained language models have achieved impressive results on various style classification tasks, but they often learn spurious domain-specific words to make predictions (Hayati et al., 2021). While human explanation highlights stylistic tokens as important features for this task, we observe that model explanations often do not align with them. To tackle this issue, we introduce StyLEx, a model that learns from human annotated explanations of stylistic features and jointly learns to perform the task and predict these features as model explanations. Our experiments show that StyLEx can provide human like stylistic lexical explanations without sacrificing the performance of sentence-level style prediction on both in-domain and out-of-domain datasets. Explanations from StyLEx show significant improvements in explanation metrics (sufficiency, plausibility) and when evaluated with human annotations. They are also more understandable by human judges compared to the widely-used saliency-based explanation baseline.

StyLEx: Explaining Style Using Human Lexical Annotations

Temporal concept drift refers to the problem of data changing over time. In the field of NLP, that would entail that language (e.g. new expressions, meaning shifts) and factual knowledge (e.g. new concepts, updated facts) evolve over time. Focusing on the latter, we benchmark 11 pretrained masked language models (MLMs) on a series of tests designed to evaluate the effect of temporal concept drift, as it is crucial that widely used language models remain up-to-date with the ever-evolving factual updates of the real world. Specifically, we provide a holistic framework that (1) dynamically creates temporal test sets of any time granularity (e.g. month, quarter, year) of factual data from Wikidata, (2) constructs fine-grained splits of tests (e.g. updated, new, unchanged facts) to ensure comprehensive analysis, and (3) evaluates MLMs in three distinct ways (single-token probing, multi-token generation, MLM scoring). In contrast to prior work, our framework aims to unveil how robust an MLM is over time and thus to provide a signal in case it has become outdated, by leveraging multiple views of evaluation.

Dynamic Benchmarking of Masked Language Models on Temporal Concept Drift with Multiple Views

Recent advances in discourse parsing performance create the impression that, as in other NLP tasks, performance for high-resource languages such as English is finally becoming reliable. In this paper we demonstrate that this is not the case, and thoroughly investigate the impact of data diversity on RST parsing stability. We show that state-of-the-art architectures trained on the standard English newswire benchmark do not generalize well, even within the news domain. Using the two largest RST corpora of English with text from multiple genres, we quantify the impact of genre diversity in training data for achieving generalization to text types unseen during training. Our results show that a heterogeneous training regime is critical for stable and generalizable models, across parser architectures. We also provide error analyses of model outputs and out-of-domain performance. To our knowledge, this study is the first to fully evaluate cross-corpus RST parsing generalizability on complete trees, examine between-genre degradation within an RST corpus, and investigate the impact of genre diversity in training data composition.

Why Can't Discourse Parsing Generalize? A Thorough Investigation of the Impact of Data Diversity

Multi-hop reasoning, a prevalent approach for query answering, aims at inferring new facts along reasonable paths over a knowledge graph.
Reinforcement learning methods can be adopted by formulating the problem into a Markov decision process.
However, common suffering within RL-based reasoning models is that the agent can be biased to spurious paths which coincidentally lead to the correct answer with poor explanation.
In this work, we take a deep dive into this phenomenon and define a metric named Path Spuriousness (PS), to quantitatively estimate to what extent a path is spurious.
Guided by the definition of PS, we design a model with a new reward that considers both answer accuracy and path reasonableness.
We test our method on four datasets and experiments reveal that our method considerably enhances the agent's capacity to prevent spurious paths while keeping comparable to state-of-the-art performance.

Path Spuriousness-aware Reinforcement Learning for Multi-Hop Knowledge Graph Reasoning

Recent advances in the capacity of large language models to generate human-like text have resulted in their increased adoption in user-facing settings. In parallel, these improvements have prompted a heated discourse around the risks of societal harms they introduce, whether inadvertent or malicious. Several studies have explored these harms and called for their mitigation via development of safer, fairer models. Going beyond enumerating the risks of harms, this work provides a survey of practical methods for addressing potential threats and societal harms from language generation models. We draw on several prior works' taxonomies of language model risks to present a structured overview of strategies for detecting and ameliorating different kinds of risks/harms of language generators. Bridging diverse strands of research, this survey aims to serve as a practical guide for both LM researchers and practitioners, with explanations of different strategies' motivations, their limitations, and open problems for future research.

Language Generation Models Can Cause Harm: So What Can We Do About It? An Actionable Survey

Self-attention weights and their transformed variants have been the main source of information for analyzing token-to-token interactions in Transformer-based models. But despite their ease of interpretation, these weights are not faithful to the models' decisions as they are only one part of an encoder, and other components in the encoder layer can have considerable impact on information mixing in the output representations. In this work, by expanding the scope of analysis to the whole encoder block, we propose Value Zeroing, a novel context mixing score customized for Transformers that provides us with a deeper understanding of how information is mixed at each encoder layer. We demonstrate the superiority of our context mixing score over other analysis methods through a series of complementary evaluations with different viewpoints based on linguistically informed rationales, probing, and faithfulness analysis.

Downloads

Next from EACL 2023

ComSearch: Equation Searching with Combinatorial Strategy for Solving Math Word Problems with Weak Supervision