What is the effect of releasing a preprint of a paper before it is submitted for peer review? No randomized controlled trial has been conducted, so we turn to observational data to answer this question. We use data from the ICLR conference (2018--2022) and apply methods from causal inference to estimate the effect of arXiving a paper before the reviewing period (early arXiving) on its acceptance to the conference. Adjusting for 18 confounders such as topic, authors, and quality, we may estimate the causal effect. However, since quality is a challenging construct to estimate, we use the negative outcome control method, using paper citation count as a control variable to debias the quality confounding effect. Our results suggest that early arXiving may have a small effect on a paper's chances of acceptance. However, this effect (when existing) does not differ significantly across different groups of authors, as grouped by author citation count and institute rank. This suggests that early arXiving does not provide an advantage to any particular group.
Few-shot fine-tuning and in-context learning are two alternative strategies for task adaptation of pre-trained language models. Recently, in-context learning has gained popularity over fine-tuning due to its simplicity and improved out-of-domain generalization, and because extensive evidence shows that fine-tuned models pick up on spurious correlations. Unfortunately, previous comparisons of the two approaches were done using models of different sizes. This raises the question of whether the observed weaker out-of-domain generalization of fine-tuned models is an inherent property of fine-tuning or a limitation of the experimental setup. In this paper, we compare the generalization of few-shot fine-tuning and in-context learning to challenge datasets, while controlling for the models used, the number of examples, and the number of parameters, ranging from 125M to 30B. Our results show that fine-tuned language models can in fact generalize well out-of-domain. We find that both approaches generalize similarly; they exhibit large variation and depend on properties such as model size and the number of examples, highlighting that robust task adaptation remains a challenge.
Piano fingering -- knowing which finger to use to play each note in a musical piece, is a hard and important skill to master when learning to play the piano. While some sheet music is available with expert-annotated fingering information, most pieces lack this information, and people often resort to learning the fingering from demonstrations in online videos. We consider the AI task of automating the extraction of fingering information from videos. This is a non-trivial task as fingers are often occluded by other fingers, and it is often not clear from the video which of the keys were pressed, requiring the synchronization of hand position information and knowledge about the notes that were played. We show how to perform this task with high-accuracy using a combination of deep-learning modules, including a GAN-based approach for fine-tuning on out-of-domain data. We extract the fingering information with an f1 score of 97\%. We run the resulting system on 90 videos, resulting in high-quality piano fingering information of 150K notes, the largest available dataset of piano-fingering to date.
While fine-tuned language models perform well on many tasks, they were also shown to rely on superficial surface features such as lexical overlap. Excessive utilization of such heuristics can lead to failure on challenging inputs. We analyze the use of lexical overlap heuristics in natural language inference, paraphrase detection, and reading comprehension (using a novel contrastive dataset), and find that larger models are much less susceptible to adopting lexical overlap heuristics. We also find that longer training leads models to abandon lexical overlap heuristics. Finally, we provide evidence that the disparity between models size has its source in the pre-trained model
Recently, the community has achieved substantial progress on many commonsense reasoning benchmarks. However, it is still unclear what is learned from the training process: the knowledge, inference capability, or both? We argue that due to the large scale of commonsense knowledge, it is infeasible to annotate a large enough training set for each task to cover all commonsense for learning. Thus we should separate the commonsense knowledge acquisition and inference over commonsense knowledge as two separate tasks. In this work, we focus on investigating models' commonsense inference capabilities from two perspectives: (1) Whether models can know if the knowledge they have is enough to solve the task; (2) Whether models can develop commonsense inference capabilities that generalize across commonsense tasks. We first align commonsense tasks with relevant knowledge from commonsense knowledge bases and ask humans to annotate whether the knowledge is enough or not. Then, we convert different commonsense tasks into a unified question answering format to evaluate models' generalization capabilities. We name the benchmark as Commonsense Inference with Knowledge-in-the-loop Question Answering (CIKQA).
The ability to generalise well is one of the primary desiderata of natural language processing (NLP). Yet, what `good generalisation' entails and how it should be evaluated is not well understood, nor are there any common standards to evaluate it. In this paper, we aim to lay the ground-work to improve both of these issues. We present a taxonomy for characterising and understanding generalisation research in NLP, we use that taxonomy to present a comprehensive map of published generalisation studies, and we make recommendations for which areas might deserve attention in the future. Our taxonomy is based on an extensive literature review of generalisation research, and contains five axes along which studies can differ: their main motivation, the type of generalisation they aim to solve, the type of data shift they consider, the source by which this data shift is obtained, and the locus of the shift within the modelling pipeline. We use our taxonomy to classify over 400 previous papers that test generalisation, for a total of more than 600 individual experiments. Considering the results of this review, we present an in-depth analysis of the current state of generalisation research in NLP, and make recommendations for the future. Along with this paper, we release a webpage where the results of our review can be dynamically explored, and which we intend to up-date as new NLP generalisation studies are published. With this work, we aim to make steps towards making state-of-the-art generalisation testing the new status quo in NLP.
Large amounts of training data are one of the major reasons for the high performance of state-of-the-art NLP models. But what exactly in the training data causes a model to make a certain prediction? We seek to answer this question by providing a language for describing how training data influences predictions, through a causal framework. Importantly, our framework bypasses the need to retrain expensive models and allows us to estimate causal effects based on observational data alone. Addressing the problem of extracting factual knowledge from pretrained language models (PLMs), we focus on simple data statistics such as co-occurrence counts and show that these statistics do influence the predictions of PLMs, suggesting that such models rely on shallow heuristics. Our causal framework and our results demonstrate the importance of studying datasets and the benefits of causality for understanding NLP models.
Understanding the relations between entities denoted by NPs in text is a critical part of human-like natural language understanding. However, only a fraction of such relations is covered by NLP tasks and models nowadays. In this work, we establish the task of text-based NP enrichment (TNE), that is, enriching each NP with all the preposition-mediated relations that hold between this and the other NPs in the text. The relations are represented as triplets, each denoting two NPs linked via a preposition. Humans recover such relations seamlessly, while current state-of-the-art models struggle with them due to the implicit nature of the problem. We build the first large-scale dataset for the problem, provide the formal framing and scope of annotation, analyze the data, and report the result of fine-tuned neural language models on the task, demonstrating the challenge it poses to current technology. We created a webpage with the data, data-exploration UI, code, models, and demo to foster further research into this challenging text understanding problem at yanaiela.github.io/TNE/.
We explore Few-Shot Learning (FSL) for Relation Classification (RC). Focusing on the realistic scenario of FSL, in which a test instance might not belong to any of the target categories (none-of-the-above, aka NOTA), we first revisit the recent popular dataset structure for FSL, pointing out its unrealistic data distribution. To remedy this, we propose a novel methodology for deriving more realistic few-shot test data from available datasets for supervised RC, and apply it to the TACRED dataset. This yields a new challenging benchmark for FSL RC, on which state of the art models show poor performance. Next, we analyze classification schemes within the popular embedding-based nearest-neighbor approach for FSL, with respect to constraints they impose on the embedding space. Triggered by this analysis we propose a novel classification scheme, in which the NOTA category is represented as learned vectors, shown empirically to be an appealing option for FSL.