Whether Transformers can learn to apply symbolic rules and generalise to out-of-distribution examples is an open research question. In this paper, we devise a data generation method for producing intricate mathematical derivations, and systematically perturb them with respect to syntax, structure, and semantics. Our task-agnostic approach generates equations, annotations, and inter-equation dependencies, employing symbolic algebra for scalable data production and augmentation. We then instantiate a general experimental framework on next-equation prediction, assessing systematic mathematical reasoning and generalisation of Transformer encoders on a total of 200K examples. The experiments reveal that perturbations heavily affect performance and can reduce F1 scores of $97\%$ to below $17\%$, suggesting that inference is dominated by surface-level patterns unrelated to a deeper understanding of mathematical operators. These findings underscore the importance of rigorous, large-scale evaluation frameworks for revealing fundamental limitations of existing models.
Rigorous evaluation of the causal effects of semantic features on language model predictions can be hard to achieve for natural language reasoning problems. However, this is such a desirable form of analysis from both an interpretability and model evaluation perspective, that it is valuable to zone in on specific patterns of reasoning with enough structure and regularity to be able to identify and quantify systematic reasoning failures in widely-used models. In this vein, we pick a portion of the NLI task for which an explicit causal diagram can be systematically constructed: in particular, the case where across two sentences (the premise and hypothesis), two related words/terms occur in a shared context. In this work, we apply causal effect estimation strategies to measure the effect of context interventions (whose effect on the entailment label is mediated by the semantic monotonicity characteristic) and interventions on the inserted word-pair (whose effect on the entailment label is mediated by the relation between these words.). Following related work on causal analysis of NLP models in different settings, we adapt the methodology for the NLI task to construct comparative model profiles in terms of robustness to irrelevant changes and sensitivity to impactful changes.
Neural-based word embeddings using solely distributional information have consistently produced useful meaning representations for downstream tasks. However, existing approaches often result in representations that are hard to interpret and control. Natural language definitions, on the other side, possess a recursive, self-explanatory semantic structure that can support novel representation learning paradigms able to preserve explicit conceptual relations and constraints in the vector space. This paper proposes a neuro-symbolic, multi-relational framework to learn word embeddings exclusively from natural language definitions by jointly mapping defined and defining terms along with their corresponding semantic relations. By automatically extracting the relations from definitions corpora and formalising the learning problem via a translational objective, we specialise the framework in hyperbolic space to capture the hierarchical and multi-resolution structure induced by the definitions. An extensive empirical analysis demonstrates that the framework can help impose the desired structural constraints while preserving the mapping required for controllable and interpretable semantic navigation. Moreover, the experiments reveal the superiority of the hyperbolic word embeddings over the euclidean counterparts and demonstrate that the multi-relational framework can obtain competitive results when compared to state-of-the-art neural approaches (including Transformers), with the advantage of being significantly more efficient and intrinsically interpretable.
This paper describes the results of SemEval 2023 task 7 -- Multi-Evidence Natural Language Inference for Clinical Trial Data (NLI4CT) -- consisting of 2 tasks, a Natural Language Inference (NLI) task, and an evidence selection task on clinical trial data. The proposed challenges require multi-hop biomedical and numerical reasoning, which are of significant importance to the development of systems capable of large-scale interpretation and retrieval of medical evidence, to provide personalized evidence-based care. Task 1, the entailment task, received 643 submissions from 40 participants, and Task 2, the evidence selection task, received 364 submissions from 23 participants. The tasks are challenging, with the majority of submitted systems failing to significantly outperform the majority class baseline on the entailment task, and we observe significantly better performance on the evidence selection task than on the entailment task. Increasing the number of model parameters leads to a direct increase in performance, far more significant than the effect of biomedical pre-training. Future works could explore the limitations of large models for generalization and numerical inference, and investigate methods to augment clinical datasets to allow for more rigorous testing and to facilitate fine-tuning. We envisage that the dataset, models, and results of this task will be useful to the biomedical NLI and evidence retrieval communities. The dataset, competition leaderboard, and website are publicly available.
How can we interpret and retrieve medical evidence to support clinical decisions? Clinical trial reports (CTR) amassed over the years contain indispensable information for the development of personalized medicine. However, it is practically infeasible to manually inspect over 400,000+ clinical trial reports in order to find the best evidence for experimental treatments. Natural Language Inference (NLI) offers a potential solution to this problem, by allowing the scalable computation of textual entailment. However, existing NLI models perform poorly on biomedical corpora, and previously published datasets fail to capture the full complexity of inference over CTRs. In this work, we present a novel resource to advance research on NLI for reasoning on CTRs. The resource includes two main tasks. Firstly, to determine the inference relation between a natural language statement, and a CTR. Secondly, to retrieve supporting facts to justify the predicted relation. We provide NLI4CT, a corpus of 2400 statements and CTRs, annotated for these tasks. Baselines on this corpus expose the limitations of existing NLI models, with 6 state-of-the-art NLI models achieving a maximum F1 score of 0.627. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to design a task that covers the interpretation of full CTRs. To encourage further work on this challenging dataset, we make the corpus, competition leaderboard, website and code to replicate the baseline experiments available at: https://github.com/ai-systems/nli4ct
Probing strategies have been shown to detect the presence of various linguistic features in large language models; in particular, semantic features intermediate to the "natural logic" fragment of the Natural Language Inference task (NLI). In the case of natural logic, the relation between the intermediate features and the entailment label is explicitly known: as such, this provides a ripe setting for interventional studies on the NLI models' representations, allowing for stronger causal conjectures and a deeper critical analysis of interventional probing methods. In this work, we carry out new and existing representation-level interventions to investigate the effect of these semantic features on NLI classification: we perform amnesic probing (which removes features as directed by learned linear probes) and introduce the mnestic probing variation (which forgets all dimensions except the probe-selected ones). Furthermore, we delve into the limitations of these methods and outline some pitfalls have been obscuring the effectivity of interventional probing studies.
Integer Linear Programming (ILP) provides a viable mechanism to encode explicit and controllable assumptions about explainable multi-hop inference with natural language. However, an ILP formulation is non-differentiable and cannot be integrated into broader deep learning architectures. Recently, Thayaparan et al. (2021a) proposed a novel methodology to integrate ILP with Transformers to achieve end-to-end differentiability for complex multi-hop inference. While this hybrid framework has been demonstrated to deliver better answer and explanation selection than transformer-based and existing ILP solvers, the neuro-symbolic integration still relies on a convex relaxation of the ILP formulation, which can produce sub-optimal solutions. To improve these limitations, we propose Diff-Comb Explainer, a novel neuro-symbolic architecture based on Differentiable BlackBox Combinatorial solvers (DBCS) (Pogan\v{c}i\'c et al., 2019). Unlike existing differentiable solvers, the presented model does not require the transformation and relaxation of the explicit semantic constraints, allowing for direct and more efficient integration of ILP formulations. Diff-Comb Explainer demonstrates improved accuracy and explainability over non-differentiable solvers, Transformers and existing differentiable constraint-based multi-hop inference frameworks.
A fundamental research goal for Explainable AI (XAI) is to build models that are capable of reasoning through the generation of natural language explanations. However, the methodologies to design and evaluate explanation-based inference models are still poorly informed by theoretical accounts on the nature of explanation. As an attempt to provide an epistemologically grounded characterisation for XAI, this paper focuses on the scientific domain, aiming to bridge the gap between theory and practice on the notion of a scientific explanation. Specifically, the paper combines a detailed survey of the modern accounts of scientific explanation in Philosophy of Science with a systematic analysis of corpora of natural language explanations, clarifying the nature and function of explanatory arguments from both a top-down (categorical) and a bottom-up (corpus-based) perspective. Through a mixture of quantitative and qualitative methodologies, the presented study allows deriving the following main conclusions: (1) Explanations cannot be entirely characterised in terms of inductive or deductive arguments as their main function is to perform unification; (2) An explanation must cite causes and mechanisms that are responsible for the occurrence of the event to be explained; (3) While natural language explanations possess an intrinsic causal-mechanistic nature, they are not limited to causes and mechanisms, also accounting for pragmatic elements such as definitions, properties and taxonomic relations; (4) Patterns of unification naturally emerge in corpora of explanations even if not intentionally modelled; (5) Unification is realised through a process of abstraction, whose function is to provide the inference substrate for subsuming the event to be explained under recurring patterns and high-level regularities.
With the methodological support of probing (or diagnostic classification), recent studies have demonstrated that Transformers encode syntactic and semantic information to some extent. Following this line of research, this paper aims at taking semantic probing to an abstraction extreme with the goal of answering the following research question: can contemporary Transformer-based models reflect an underlying Foundational Ontology? To this end, we present a systematic Foundational Ontology (FO) probing methodology to investigate whether Transformers-based models encode abstract semantic information. Following different pre-training and fine-tuning regimes, we present an extensive evaluation of a diverse set of large-scale language models over three distinct and complementary FO tagging experiments. Specifically, we present and discuss the following conclusions: (1) The probing results indicate that Transformer-based models incidentally encode information related to Foundational Ontologies during the pre-training pro-cess; (2) Robust FO taggers (accuracy of 90 percent)can be efficiently built leveraging on this knowledge.