The social sciences have produced an impressive body of research on determinants of fertility outcomes, or whether and when people have children. However, the strength of these determinants and underlying theories are rarely evaluated on their predictive ability on new data. This prevents us from systematically comparing studies, hindering the evaluation and accumulation of knowledge. In this paper, we present two datasets which can be used to study the predictability of fertility outcomes in the Netherlands. One dataset is based on the LISS panel, a longitudinal survey which includes thousands of variables on a wide range of topics, including individual preferences and values. The other is based on the Dutch register data which lacks attitudinal data but includes detailed information about the life courses of millions of Dutch residents. We provide information about the datasets and the samples, and describe the fertility outcome of interest. We also introduce the fertility prediction data challenge PreFer which is based on these datasets and will start in Spring 2024. We outline the ways in which measuring the predictability of fertility outcomes using these datasets and combining their strengths in the data challenge can advance our understanding of fertility behaviour and computational social science. We further provide details for participants on how to take part in the data challenge.
Establishing whether language models can use contextual information in a human-plausible way is important to ensure their safe adoption in real-world settings. However, the questions of when and which parts of the context affect model generations are typically tackled separately, and current plausibility evaluations are practically limited to a handful of artificial benchmarks. To address this, we introduce Plausibility Evaluation of Context Reliance (PECoRe), an end-to-end interpretability framework designed to quantify context usage in language models' generations. Our approach leverages model internals to (i) contrastively identify context-sensitive target tokens in generated texts and (ii) link them to contextual cues justifying their prediction. We use PECoRe to quantify the plausibility of context-aware machine translation models, comparing model rationales with human annotations across several discourse-level phenomena. Finally, we apply our method to unannotated generations to identify context-mediated predictions and highlight instances of (im)plausible context usage in model translations.
Due to language models' propensity to generate toxic or hateful responses, several techniques were developed to align model generations with users' preferences. Despite the effectiveness of such methods in improving the safety of model interactions, their impact on models' internal processes is still poorly understood. In this work, we apply popular detoxification approaches to several language models and quantify their impact on the resulting models' prompt dependence using feature attribution methods. We evaluate the effectiveness of counter-narrative fine-tuning and compare it with reinforcement learning-driven detoxification, observing differences in prompt reliance between the two methods despite their similar detoxification performances.
Different ways of linguistically expressing the same real-world event can lead to different perceptions of what happened. Previous work has shown that different descriptions of gender-based violence (GBV) influence the reader's perception of who is to blame for the violence, possibly reinforcing stereotypes which see the victim as partly responsible, too. As a contribution to raise awareness on perspective-based writing, and to facilitate access to alternative perspectives, we introduce the novel task of automatically rewriting GBV descriptions as a means to alter the perceived level of responsibility on the perpetrator. We present a quasi-parallel dataset of sentences with low and high perceived responsibility levels for the perpetrator, and experiment with unsupervised (mBART-based), zero-shot and few-shot (GPT3-based) methods for rewriting sentences. We evaluate our models using a questionnaire study and a suite of automatic metrics.
Pre-trained language models (PLMs) have achieved great success in NLP and have recently been used for tasks in computational semantics. However, these tasks do not fully benefit from PLMs since meaning representations are not explicitly included in the pre-training stage. We introduce multilingual pre-trained language-meaning models based on Discourse Representation Structures (DRSs), including meaning representations besides natural language texts in the same model, and design a new strategy to reduce the gap between the pre-training and fine-tuning objectives. Since DRSs are language neutral, cross-lingual transfer learning is adopted to further improve the performance of non-English tasks. Automatic evaluation results show that our approach achieves the best performance on both the multilingual DRS parsing and DRS-to-text generation tasks. Correlation analysis between automatic metrics and human judgements on the generation task further validates the effectiveness of our model. Human inspection reveals that out-of-vocabulary tokens are the main cause of erroneous results.
Figures of speech help people express abstract concepts and evoke stronger emotions than literal expressions, thereby making texts more creative and engaging. Due to its pervasive and fundamental character, figurative language understanding has been addressed in Natural Language Processing, but it's highly understudied in a multilingual setting and when considering more than one figure of speech at the same time. To bridge this gap, we introduce multilingual multi-figurative language modelling, and provide a benchmark for sentence-level figurative language detection, covering three common figures of speech and seven languages. Specifically, we develop a framework for figurative language detection based on template-based prompt learning. In so doing, we unify multiple detection tasks that are interrelated across multiple figures of speech and languages, without requiring task- or language-specific modules. Experimental results show that our framework outperforms several strong baselines and may serve as a blueprint for the joint modelling of other interrelated tasks.
We introduce the Dutch Model Benchmark: DUMB. The benchmark includes a diverse set of datasets for low-, medium- and high-resource tasks. The total set of eight tasks include three tasks that were previously not available in Dutch. Instead of relying on a mean score across tasks, we propose Relative Error Reduction (RER), which compares the DUMB performance of models to a strong baseline which can be referred to in the future even when assessing different sets of models. Through a comparison of 14 pre-trained models (mono- and multi-lingual, of varying sizes), we assess the internal consistency of the benchmark tasks, as well as the factors that likely enable high performance. Our results indicate that current Dutch monolingual models under-perform and suggest training larger Dutch models with other architectures and pre-training objectives. At present, the highest performance is achieved by DeBERTaV3 (large), XLM-R (large) and mDeBERTaV3 (base). In addition to highlighting best strategies for training larger Dutch models, DUMB will foster further research on Dutch. A public leaderboard is available at https://dumbench.nl.
We report our efforts in identifying a set of previous human evaluations in NLP that would be suitable for a coordinated study examining what makes human evaluations in NLP more/less reproducible. We present our results and findings, which include that just 13\% of papers had (i) sufficiently low barriers to reproduction, and (ii) enough obtainable information, to be considered for reproduction, and that all but one of the experiments we selected for reproduction was discovered to have flaws that made the meaningfulness of conducting a reproduction questionable. As a result, we had to change our coordinated study design from a reproduce approach to a standardise-then-reproduce-twice approach. Our overall (negative) finding that the great majority of human evaluations in NLP is not repeatable and/or not reproducible and/or too flawed to justify reproduction, paints a dire picture, but presents an opportunity for a rethink about how to design and report human evaluations in NLP.
We investigate the potential of ChatGPT as a multidimensional evaluator for the task of \emph{Text Style Transfer}, alongside, and in comparison to, existing automatic metrics as well as human judgements. We focus on a zero-shot setting, i.e. prompting ChatGPT with specific task instructions, and test its performance on three commonly-used dimensions of text style transfer evaluation: style strength, content preservation, and fluency. We perform a comprehensive correlation analysis for two transfer directions (and overall) at different levels. Compared to existing automatic metrics, ChatGPT achieves competitive correlations with human judgments. These preliminary results are expected to provide a first glimpse into the role of large language models in the multidimensional evaluation of stylized text generation.
Different linguistic expressions can conceptualize the same event from different viewpoints by emphasizing certain participants over others. Here, we investigate a case where this has social consequences: how do linguistic expressions of gender-based violence (GBV) influence who we perceive as responsible? We build on previous psycholinguistic research in this area and conduct a large-scale perception survey of GBV descriptions automatically extracted from a corpus of Italian newspapers. We then train regression models that predict the salience of GBV participants with respect to different dimensions of perceived responsibility. Our best model (fine-tuned BERT) shows solid overall performance, with large differences between dimensions and participants: salient _focus_ is more predictable than salient _blame_, and perpetrators' salience is more predictable than victims' salience. Experiments with ridge regression models using different representations show that features based on linguistic theory similarly to word-based features. Overall, we show that different linguistic choices do trigger different perceptions of responsibility, and that such perceptions can be modelled automatically. This work can be a core instrument to raise awareness of the consequences of different perspectivizations in the general public and in news producers alike.