Generating Uncontextualized and Contextualized Questions for Document-Level Event Argument Extraction

This paper presents multiple question generation strategies for document-level event argument extraction. These strategies do not require human involvement and result in uncontextualized questions as well as contextualized questions grounded on the event and document of interest. Experimental results show that combining uncontextualized and contextualized questions is beneficial, especially when event triggers and arguments appear in different sentences. Our approach does not have corpus-specific components, in particular, the question generation strategies transfer across corpora. We also present a qualitative analysis of the most common errors made by our best model.

Outcome-Constrained Large Language Models for Countering Hate Speech

Counterspeech that challenges or responds to hate speech has been seen as an alternative to mitigate the negative impact of hate speech and foster productive online communications. Research endeavors have been directed to using language models for the automatic generation of counterspeech to assist efforts in combating online hate. Existing research focuses on the generation of counterspeech with certain linguistic attributes, such as being polite, informative, and intent-driven. However, it remains unclear what impact the counterspeech might have in an online environment. We first explore methods that utilize large language models (LLM) to generate counterspeech constrained by potential conversation outcomes. We build two conversation outcome classifiers that predict the incivility level and the hater reentry behavior following replies to hate with Reddit data, then propose four methods to incorporate the desired outcomes, i.e., low conversation incivility and non-hateful hater reentry, into the text generation process, including Prompt with Instructions, Prompt and Select, LLM finetune, and LLM transformer reinforcement learning (TRL). Evaluation results show effective strategies to generate outcome-constrained counterspeech and the linguistic characteristics of texts generated by different methods.

RobustSentEmbed: Robust Sentence Embeddings Using Adversarial Self-Supervised Contrastive Learning

Pre-trained language models (PLMs) have consistently demonstrated outstanding performance across a diverse spectrum of natural language processing tasks. Nevertheless, despite their success with unseen data, current PLM-based representations often exhibit poor robustness in adversarial settings. In this paper, we introduce RobustSentEmbed, a self-supervised sentence embedding framework designed to improve both generalization and robustness in diverse text representation tasks and against a diverse set of adversarial attacks. Through the generation of high-risk adversarial perturbations and their utilization in a novel objective function, RobustSentEmbed adeptly learns high-quality and robust sentence embeddings. Our experiments confirm the superiority of RobustSentEmbed over state-of-the-art representations. Specifically, Our framework achieves a significant reduction in the success rate of various adversarial attacks, notably reducing the BERTAttack success rate by almost half (from 75.51\% to 38.81\%). The framework also yields improvements of 1.59\% and 0.23\% in semantic textual similarity tasks and various transfer tasks, respectively.

Hate Cannot Drive out Hate: Forecasting Conversation Incivility following Replies to Hate Speech

User-generated replies to hate speech are promising means to combat hatred, but questions about whether they can stop incivility in follow-up conversations linger. We argue that effective replies stop incivility from emerging in follow-up conversations - replies that elicit more incivility are counterproductive. This study introduces the task of predicting the incivility of conversations following replies to hate speech. We first propose a metric to measure conversation incivility based on the number of civil and uncivil comments as well as the unique authors involved in the discourse. Our metric approximates human judgments more accurately than previous metrics. We then use the metric to evaluate the outcomes of replies to hate speech. A linguistic analysis uncovers the differences in the language of replies that elicit follow-up conversations with high and low incivility. Experimental results show that forecasting incivility is challenging. We close with a qualitative analysis shedding light into the most common errors made by the best model.

Interpreting Answers to Yes-No Questions in User-Generated Content

Interpreting answers to yes-no questions in social media is difficult. Yes and no keywords are uncommon, and the few answers that include them are rarely to be interpreted what the keywords suggest. In this paper, we present a new corpus of 4,442 yes-no question-answer pairs from Twitter. We discuss linguistic characteristics of answers whose interpretation is yes or no, as well as answers whose interpretation is unknown. We show that large language models are far from solving this problem, even after fine-tuning and blending other corpora for the same problem but outside social media.

Interpreting Indirect Answers to Yes-No Questions in Multiple Languages

Yes-no questions expect a yes or no for an answer, but people often skip polar keywords. Instead, they answer with long explanations that must be interpreted. In this paper, we focus on this challenging problem and release new benchmarks in eight languages. We present a distant supervision approach to collect training data. We also demonstrate that direct answers (i.e., with polar keywords) are useful to train models to interpret indirect answers (i.e., without polar keywords). Experimental results demonstrate that monolingual fine-tuning is beneficial if training data can be obtained via distant supervision for the language of interest (5 languages). Additionally, we show that cross-lingual fine-tuning is always beneficial (8 languages).

Synthetic Dataset for Evaluating Complex Compositional Knowledge for Natural Language Inference

We introduce a synthetic dataset called Sentences Involving Complex Compositional Knowledge (SICCK) and a novel analysis that investigates the performance of Natural Language Inference (NLI) models to understand compositionality in logic. We produce 1,304 sentence pairs by modifying 15 examples from the SICK dataset (Marelli et al., 2014). To this end, we modify the original texts using a set of phrases - modifiers that correspond to universal quantifiers, existential quantifiers, negation, and other concept modifiers in Natural Logic (NL) (MacCartney, 2009). We use these phrases to modify the subject, verb, and object parts of the premise and hypothesis. Lastly, we annotate these modified texts with the corresponding entailment labels following NL rules. We conduct a preliminary verification of how well the change in the structural and semantic composition is captured by neural NLI models, in both zero-shot and fine-tuned scenarios. We found that the performance of NLI models under the zero-shot setting is poor, especially for modified sentences with negation and existential quantifiers. After fine-tuning this dataset, we observe that models continue to perform poorly over negation, existential and universal modifiers.

Leveraging Affirmative Interpretations from Negation Improves Natural Language Understanding

Negation poses a challenge in many natural language understanding tasks. Inspired by the fact that understanding a negated statement often requires humans to infer affirmative interpretations, in this paper we show that doing so benefits models for three natural language understanding tasks. We present an automated procedure to collect pairs of sentences with negation and their affirmative interpretations, resulting in over 150,000 pairs. Experimental results show that leveraging these pairs helps (a) T5 generate affirmative interpretations from negations in a previous benchmark, and (b) a RoBERTa-based classifier solve the task of natural language inference. We also leverage our pairs to build a plug-and-play neural generator that given a negated statement generates an affirmative interpretation. Then, we incorporate the pretrained generator into a RoBERTa-based classifier for sentiment analysis and show that doing so improves the results. Crucially, our proposal does not require any manual effort.

Hate Speech and Counter Speech Detection: Conversational Context Does Matter

Hate speech is plaguing the cyberspace along with user-generated content. This paper investigates the role of conversational context in the annotation and detection of online hate and counter speech, where context is defined as the preceding comment in a conversation thread. We created a context-aware dataset for a 3-way classification task on Reddit comments: hate speech, counter speech, or neutral. Our analyses indicate that context is critical to identify hate and counter speech: human judgments change for most comments depending on whether we show annotators the context. A linguistic analysis draws insights into the language people use to express hate and counter speech. Experimental results show that neural networks obtain significantly better results if context is taken into account. We also present qualitative error analyses shedding light into (a) when and why context is beneficial and (b) the remaining errors made by our best model when context is taken into account.

A Question-Answer Driven Approach to Reveal Affirmative Interpretations from Verbal Negations

This paper explores a question-answer driven approach to reveal affirmative interpretations from verbal negations (i.e., when a negation cue grammatically modifies a verb). We create a new corpus consisting of 4,472 verbal negations and discover that 67.1% of them convey that an event actually occurred. Annotators generate and answer 7,277 questions for the 3,001 negations that convey an affirmative interpretation. We first cast the problem of revealing affirmative interpretations from negations as a natural language inference (NLI) classification task. Experimental results show that state-of-the-art transformers trained with existing NLI corpora are insufficient to reveal affirmative interpretations. We also observe, however, that fine-tuning brings small improvements. In addition to NLI classification, we also explore the more realistic task of generating affirmative interpretations directly from negations with the T5 transformer. We conclude that the generation task remains a challenge as T5 substantially underperforms humans.