COVID-19 Deterioration Prediction via Self-Supervised Representation Learning and Multi-Image Prediction

The rapid spread of COVID-19 cases in recent months has strained hospital resources, making rapid and accurate triage of patients presenting to emergency departments a necessity. Machine learning techniques using clinical data such as chest X-rays have been used to predict which patients are most at risk of deterioration. We consider the task of predicting two types of patient deterioration based on chest X-rays: adverse event deterioration (i.e., transfer to the intensive care unit, intubation, or mortality) and increased oxygen requirements beyond 6 L per day. Due to the relative scarcity of COVID-19 patient data, existing solutions leverage supervised pretraining on related non-COVID images, but this is limited by the differences between the pretraining data and the target COVID-19 patient data. In this paper, we use self-supervised learning based on the momentum contrast (MoCo) method in the pretraining phase to learn more general image representations to use for downstream tasks. We present three results. The first is deterioration prediction from a single image, where our model achieves an area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.742 for predicting an adverse event within 96 hours (compared to 0.703 with supervised pretraining) and an AUC of 0.765 for predicting oxygen requirements greater than 6 L a day at 24 hours (compared to 0.749 with supervised pretraining). We then propose a new transformer-based architecture that can process sequences of multiple images for prediction and show that this model can achieve an improved AUC of 0.786 for predicting an adverse event at 96 hours and an AUC of 0.848 for predicting mortalities at 96 hours. A small pilot clinical study suggested that the prediction accuracy of our model is comparable to that of experienced radiologists analyzing the same information.

Unnatural Language Inference

Natural Language Understanding has witnessed a watershed moment with the introduction of large pre-trained Transformer networks. These models achieve state-of-the-art on various tasks, notably including Natural Language Inference (NLI). Many studies have shown that the large representation space imbibed by the models encodes some syntactic and semantic information. However, to really "know syntax", a model must recognize when its input violates syntactic rules and calculate inferences accordingly. In this work, we find that state-of-the-art NLI models, such as RoBERTa and BART are invariant to, and sometimes even perform better on, examples with randomly reordered words. With iterative search, we are able to construct randomized versions of NLI test sets, which contain permuted hypothesis-premise pairs with the same words as the original, yet are classified with perfect accuracy by large pre-trained models, as well as pre-Transformer state-of-the-art encoders. We find the issue to be language and model invariant, and hence investigate the root cause. To partially alleviate this effect, we propose a simple training methodology. Our findings call into question the idea that our natural language understanding models, and the tasks used for measuring their progress, genuinely require a human-like understanding of syntax.

Measuring Systematic Generalization in Neural Proof Generation with Transformers

We are interested in understanding how well Transformer language models (TLMs) can perform reasoning tasks when trained on knowledge encoded in the form of natural language. We investigate their systematic generalization abilities on a logical reasoning task in natural language, which involves reasoning over relationships between entities grounded in first-order logical proofs. Specifically, we perform soft theorem-proving by leveraging TLMs to generate natural language proofs. We test the generated proofs for logical consistency, along with the accuracy of the final inference. We observe length-generalization issues when evaluated on longer-than-trained sequences. However, we observe TLMs improve their generalization performance after being exposed to longer, exhaustive proofs. In addition, we discover that TLMs are able to generalize better using backward-chaining proofs compared to their forward-chaining counterparts, while they find it easier to generate forward chaining proofs. We observe that models that are not trained to generate proofs are better at generalizing to problems based on longer proofs. This suggests that Transformers have efficient internal reasoning strategies that are harder to interpret. These results highlight the systematic generalization behavior of TLMs in the context of logical reasoning, and we believe this work motivates deeper inspection of their underlying reasoning strategies.

A Closer Look at Codistillation for Distributed Training

Codistillation has been proposed as a mechanism to share knowledge among concurrently trained models by encouraging them to represent the same function through an auxiliary loss. This contrasts with the more commonly used fully-synchronous data-parallel stochastic gradient descent methods, where different model replicas average their gradients (or parameters) at every iteration and thus maintain identical parameters. We investigate codistillation in a distributed training setup, complementing previous work which focused on extremely large batch sizes. Surprisingly, we find that even at moderate batch sizes, models trained with codistillation can perform as well as models trained with synchronous data-parallel methods, despite using a much weaker synchronization mechanism. These findings hold across a range of batch sizes and learning rate schedules, as well as different kinds of models and datasets. Obtaining this level of accuracy, however, requires properly accounting for the regularization effect of codistillation, which we highlight through several empirical observations. Overall, this work contributes to a better understanding of codistillation and how to best take advantage of it in a distributed computing environment.

Ideas for Improving the Field of Machine Learning: Summarizing Discussion from the NeurIPS 2019 Retrospectives Workshop

This report documents ideas for improving the field of machine learning, which arose from discussions at the ML Retrospectives workshop at NeurIPS 2019. The goal of the report is to disseminate these ideas more broadly, and in turn encourage continuing discussion about how the field could improve along these axes. We focus on topics that were most discussed at the workshop: incentives for encouraging alternate forms of scholarship, re-structuring the review process, participation from academia and industry, and how we might better train computer scientists as scientists. Videos from the workshop can be accessed at https://slideslive.com/neurips/west-114-115-retrospectives-a-venue-for-selfreflection-in-ml-research

Probing Linguistic Systematicity

Recently, there has been much interest in the question of whether deep natural language understanding models exhibit systematicity; generalizing such that units like words make consistent contributions to the meaning of the sentences in which they appear. There is accumulating evidence that neural models often generalize non-systematically. We examined the notion of systematicity from a linguistic perspective, defining a set of probes and a set of metrics to measure systematic behaviour. We also identified ways in which network architectures can generalize non-systematically, and discuss why such forms of generalization may be unsatisfying. As a case study, we performed a series of experiments in the setting of natural language inference (NLI), demonstrating that some NLU systems achieve high overall performance despite being non-systematic.

Learning an Unreferenced Metric for Online Dialogue Evaluation

Evaluating the quality of a dialogue interaction between two agents is a difficult task, especially in open-domain chit-chat style dialogue. There have been recent efforts to develop automatic dialogue evaluation metrics, but most of them do not generalize to unseen datasets and/or need a human-generated reference response during inference, making it infeasible for online evaluation. Here, we propose an unreferenced automated evaluation metric that uses large pre-trained language models to extract latent representations of utterances, and leverages the temporal transitions that exist between them. We show that our model achieves higher correlation with human annotations in an online setting, while not requiring true responses for comparison during inference.

Improving Reproducibility in Machine Learning Research (A Report from the NeurIPS 2019 Reproducibility Program)

One of the challenges in machine learning research is to ensure that presented and published results are sound and reliable. Reproducibility, that is obtaining similar results as presented in a paper or talk, using the same code and data (when available), is a necessary step to verify the reliability of research findings. Reproducibility is also an important step to promote open and accessible research, thereby allowing the scientific community to quickly integrate new findings and convert ideas to practice. Reproducibility also promotes the use of robust experimental workflows, which potentially reduce unintentional errors. In 2019, the Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) conference, the premier international conference for research in machine learning, introduced a reproducibility program, designed to improve the standards across the community for how we conduct, communicate, and evaluate machine learning research. The program contained three components: a code submission policy, a community-wide reproducibility challenge, and the inclusion of the Machine Learning Reproducibility checklist as part of the paper submission process. In this paper, we describe each of these components, how it was deployed, as well as what we were able to learn from this initiative.