Global Transition-based Non-projective Dependency Parsing

Shi, Huang, and Lee (2017) obtained state-of-the-art results for English and Chinese dependency parsing by combining dynamic-programming implementations of transition-based dependency parsers with a minimal set of bidirectional LSTM features. However, their results were limited to projective parsing. In this paper, we extend their approach to support non-projectivity by providing the first practical implementation of the MH_4 algorithm, an $O(n^4)$ mildly nonprojective dynamic-programming parser with very high coverage on non-projective treebanks. To make MH_4 compatible with minimal transition-based feature sets, we introduce a transition-based interpretation of it in which parser items are mapped to sequences of transitions. We thus obtain the first implementation of global decoding for non-projective transition-based parsing, and demonstrate empirically that it is more effective than its projective counterpart in parsing a number of highly non-projective languages

Quantifying the visual concreteness of words and topics in multimodal datasets

Multimodal machine learning algorithms aim to learn visual-textual correspondences. Previous work suggests that concepts with concrete visual manifestations may be easier to learn than concepts with abstract ones. We give an algorithm for automatically computing the visual concreteness of words and topics within multimodal datasets. We apply the approach in four settings, ranging from image captions to images/text scraped from historical books. In addition to enabling explorations of concepts in multimodal datasets, our concreteness scores predict the capacity of machine learning algorithms to learn textual/visual relationships. We find that 1) concrete concepts are indeed easier to learn; 2) the large number of algorithms we consider have similar failure cases; 3) the precise positive relationship between concreteness and performance varies between datasets. We conclude with recommendations for using concreteness scores to facilitate future multimodal research.

Improving Coverage and Runtime Complexity for Exact Inference in Non-Projective Transition-Based Dependency Parsers

We generalize Cohen, G\'omez-Rodr\'iguez, and Satta's (2011) parser to a family of non-projective transition-based dependency parsers allowing polynomial-time exact inference. This includes novel parsers with better coverage than Cohen et al. (2011), and even a variant that reduces time complexity to $O(n^6)$, improving over the known bounds in exact inference for non-projective transition-based parsing. We hope that this piece of theoretical work inspires design of novel transition systems with better coverage and better run-time guarantees. Code available at https://github.com/tzshi/nonproj-dp-variants-naacl2018

Fast(er) Exact Decoding and Global Training for Transition-Based Dependency Parsing via a Minimal Feature Set

We first present a minimal feature set for transition-based dependency parsing, continuing a recent trend started by Kiperwasser and Goldberg (2016a) and Cross and Huang (2016a) of using bi-directional LSTM features. We plug our minimal feature set into the dynamic-programming framework of Huang and Sagae (2010) and Kuhlmann et al. (2011) to produce the first implementation of worst-case O(n^3) exact decoders for arc-hybrid and arc-eager transition systems. With our minimal features, we also present O(n^3) global training methods. Finally, using ensembles including our new parsers, we achieve the best unlabeled attachment score reported (to our knowledge) on the Chinese Treebank and the "second-best-in-class" result on the English Penn Treebank.

Cats and Captions vs. Creators and the Clock: Comparing Multimodal Content to Context in Predicting Relative Popularity

The content of today's social media is becoming more and more rich, increasingly mixing text, images, videos, and audio. It is an intriguing research question to model the interplay between these different modes in attracting user attention and engagement. But in order to pursue this study of multimodal content, we must also account for context: timing effects, community preferences, and social factors (e.g., which authors are already popular) also affect the amount of feedback and reaction that social-media posts receive. In this work, we separate out the influence of these non-content factors in several ways. First, we focus on ranking pairs of submissions posted to the same community in quick succession, e.g., within 30 seconds, this framing encourages models to focus on time-agnostic and community-specific content features. Within that setting, we determine the relative performance of author vs. content features. We find that victory usually belongs to "cats and captions," as visual and textual features together tend to outperform identity-based features. Moreover, our experiments show that when considered in isolation, simple unigram text features and deep neural network visual features yield the highest accuracy individually, and that the combination of the two modalities generally leads to the best accuracies overall.

When confidence and competence collide: Effects on online decision-making discussions

Group discussions are a way for individuals to exchange ideas and arguments in order to reach better decisions than they could on their own. One of the premises of productive discussions is that better solutions will prevail, and that the idea selection process is mediated by the (relative) competence of the individuals involved. However, since people may not know their actual competence on a new task, their behavior is influenced by their self-estimated competence --- that is, their confidence --- which can be misaligned with their actual competence. Our goal in this work is to understand the effects of confidence-competence misalignment on the dynamics and outcomes of discussions. To this end, we design a large-scale natural setting, in the form of an online team-based geography game, that allows us to disentangle confidence from competence and thus separate their effects. We find that in task-oriented discussions, the more-confident individuals have a larger impact on the group's decisions even when these individuals are at the same level of competence as their teammates. Furthermore, this unjustified role of confidence in the decision-making process often leads teams to under-perform. We explore this phenomenon by investigating the effects of confidence on conversational dynamics.

Talk it up or play it down? (Un)expected correlations between (de-)emphasis and recurrence of discussion points in consequential U.S. economic policy meetings

In meetings where important decisions get made, what items receive more attention may influence the outcome. We examine how different types of rhetorical (de-)emphasis -- including hedges, superlatives, and contrastive conjunctions -- correlate with what gets revisited later, controlling for item frequency and speaker. Our data consists of transcripts of recurring meetings of the Federal Reserve's Open Market Committee (FOMC), where important aspects of U.S. monetary policy are decided on. Surprisingly, we find that words appearing in the context of hedging, which is usually considered a way to express uncertainty, are more likely to be repeated in subsequent meetings, while strong emphasis indicated by superlatives has a slightly negative effect on word recurrence in subsequent meetings. We also observe interesting patterns in how these effects vary depending on social factors such as status and gender of the speaker. For instance, the positive effects of hedging are more pronounced for female speakers than for male speakers.

Tie-breaker: Using language models to quantify gender bias in sports journalism

Gender bias is an increasingly important issue in sports journalism. In this work, we propose a language-model-based approach to quantify differences in questions posed to female vs. male athletes, and apply it to tennis post-match interviews. We find that journalists ask male players questions that are generally more focused on the game when compared with the questions they ask their female counterparts. We also provide a fine-grained analysis of the extent to which the salience of this bias depends on various factors, such as question type, game outcome or player rank.

Winning Arguments: Interaction Dynamics and Persuasion Strategies in Good-faith Online Discussions

Changing someone's opinion is arguably one of the most important challenges of social interaction. The underlying process proves difficult to study: it is hard to know how someone's opinions are formed and whether and how someone's views shift. Fortunately, ChangeMyView, an active community on Reddit, provides a platform where users present their own opinions and reasoning, invite others to contest them, and acknowledge when the ensuing discussions change their original views. In this work, we study these interactions to understand the mechanisms behind persuasion. We find that persuasive arguments are characterized by interesting patterns of interaction dynamics, such as participant entry-order and degree of back-and-forth exchange. Furthermore, by comparing similar counterarguments to the same opinion, we show that language factors play an essential role. In particular, the interplay between the language of the opinion holder and that of the counterargument provides highly predictive cues of persuasiveness. Finally, since even in this favorable setting people may not be persuaded, we investigate the problem of determining whether someone's opinion is susceptible to being changed at all. For this more difficult task, we show that stylistic choices in how the opinion is expressed carry predictive power.

All Who Wander: On the Prevalence and Characteristics of Multi-community Engagement

Although analyzing user behavior within individual communities is an active and rich research domain, people usually interact with multiple communities both on- and off-line. How do users act in such multi-community environments? Although there are a host of intriguing aspects to this question, it has received much less attention in the research community in comparison to the intra-community case. In this paper, we examine three aspects of multi-community engagement: the sequence of communities that users post to, the language that users employ in those communities, and the feedback that users receive, using longitudinal posting behavior on Reddit as our main data source, and DBLP for auxiliary experiments. We also demonstrate the effectiveness of features drawn from these aspects in predicting users' future level of activity. One might expect that a user's trajectory mimics the "settling-down" process in real life: an initial exploration of sub-communities before settling down into a few niches. However, we find that the users in our data continually post in new communities; moreover, as time goes on, they post increasingly evenly among a more diverse set of smaller communities. Interestingly, it seems that users that eventually leave the community are "destined" to do so from the very beginning, in the sense of showing significantly different "wandering" patterns very early on in their trajectories; this finding has potentially important design implications for community maintainers. Our multi-community perspective also allows us to investigate the "situation vs. personality" debate from language usage across different communities.