Measuring Causal Effects of Data Statistics on Language Model's `Factual' Predictions

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.

Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models

Language models demonstrate both quantitative improvement and new qualitative capabilities with increasing scale. Despite their potentially transformative impact, these new capabilities are as yet poorly characterized. In order to inform future research, prepare for disruptive new model capabilities, and ameliorate socially harmful effects, it is vital that we understand the present and near-future capabilities and limitations of language models. To address this challenge, we introduce the Beyond the Imitation Game benchmark (BIG-bench). BIG-bench currently consists of 204 tasks, contributed by 442 authors across 132 institutions. Task topics are diverse, drawing problems from linguistics, childhood development, math, common-sense reasoning, biology, physics, social bias, software development, and beyond. BIG-bench focuses on tasks that are believed to be beyond the capabilities of current language models. We evaluate the behavior of OpenAI's GPT models, Google-internal dense transformer architectures, and Switch-style sparse transformers on BIG-bench, across model sizes spanning millions to hundreds of billions of parameters. In addition, a team of human expert raters performed all tasks in order to provide a strong baseline. Findings include: model performance and calibration both improve with scale, but are poor in absolute terms (and when compared with rater performance); performance is remarkably similar across model classes, though with benefits from sparsity; tasks that improve gradually and predictably commonly involve a large knowledge or memorization component, whereas tasks that exhibit "breakthrough" behavior at a critical scale often involve multiple steps or components, or brittle metrics; social bias typically increases with scale in settings with ambiguous context, but this can be improved with prompting.

IDANI: Inference-time Domain Adaptation via Neuron-level Interventions

Large pre-trained models are usually fine-tuned on downstream task data, and tested on unseen data. When the train and test data come from different domains, the model is likely to struggle, as it is not adapted to the test domain. We propose a new approach for domain adaptation (DA), using neuron-level interventions: We modify the representation of each test example in specific neurons, resulting in a counterfactual example from the source domain, which the model is more familiar with. The modified example is then fed back into the model. While most other DA methods are applied during training time, ours is applied during inference only, making it more efficient and applicable. Our experiments show that our method improves performance on unseen domains.

MRKL Systems: A modular, neuro-symbolic architecture that combines large language models, external knowledge sources and discrete reasoning

Huge language models (LMs) have ushered in a new era for AI, serving as a gateway to natural-language-based knowledge tasks. Although an essential element of modern AI, LMs are also inherently limited in a number of ways. We discuss these limitations and how they can be avoided by adopting a systems approach. Conceptualizing the challenge as one that involves knowledge and reasoning in addition to linguistic processing, we define a flexible architecture with multiple neural models, complemented by discrete knowledge and reasoning modules. We describe this neuro-symbolic architecture, dubbed the Modular Reasoning, Knowledge and Language (MRKL, pronounced "miracle") system, some of the technical challenges in implementing it, and Jurassic-X, AI21 Labs' MRKL system implementation.

How Gender Debiasing Affects Internal Model Representations, and Why It Matters

Common studies of gender bias in NLP focus either on extrinsic bias measured by model performance on a downstream task or on intrinsic bias found in models' internal representations. However, the relationship between extrinsic and intrinsic bias is relatively unknown. In this work, we illuminate this relationship by measuring both quantities together: we debias a model during downstream fine-tuning, which reduces extrinsic bias, and measure the effect on intrinsic bias, which is operationalized as bias extractability with information-theoretic probing. Through experiments on two tasks and multiple bias metrics, we show that our intrinsic bias metric is a better indicator of debiasing than (a contextual adaptation of) the standard WEAT metric, and can also expose cases of superficial debiasing. Our framework provides a comprehensive perspective on bias in NLP models, which can be applied to deploy NLP systems in a more informed manner. Our code will be made publicly available.

A Multilingual Perspective Towards the Evaluation of Attribution Methods in Natural Language Inference

Most evaluations of attribution methods focus on the English language. In this work, we present a multilingual approach for evaluating attribution methods for the Natural Language Inference (NLI) task in terms of plausibility and faithfulness properties. First, we introduce a novel cross-lingual strategy to measure faithfulness based on word alignments, which eliminates the potential downsides of erasure-based evaluations. We then perform a comprehensive evaluation of attribution methods, considering different output mechanisms and aggregation methods. Finally, we augment the XNLI dataset with highlight-based explanations, providing a multilingual NLI dataset with highlights, which may support future exNLP studies. Our results show that attribution methods performing best for plausibility and faithfulness are different.

Locating and Editing Factual Knowledge in GPT

We investigate the mechanisms underlying factual knowledge recall in autoregressive transformer language models. First, we develop a causal intervention for identifying neuron activations capable of altering a model's factual predictions. Within large GPT-style models, this reveals two distinct sets of neurons that we hypothesize correspond to knowing an abstract fact and saying a concrete word, respectively. This insight inspires the development of ROME, a novel method for editing facts stored in model weights. For evaluation, we assemble CounterFact, a dataset of over twenty thousand counterfactuals and tools to facilitate sensitive measurements of knowledge editing. Using CounterFact, we confirm the distinction between saying and knowing neurons, and we find that ROME achieves state-of-the-art performance in knowledge editing compared to other methods. An interactive demo notebook, full code implementation, and the dataset are available at https://rome.baulab.info/.

On the Pitfalls of Analyzing Individual Neurons in Language Models

While many studies have shown that linguistic information is encoded in hidden word representations, few have studied individual neurons, to show how and in which neurons it is encoded. Among these, the common approach is to use an external probe to rank neurons according to their relevance to some linguistic attribute, and to evaluate the obtained ranking using the same probe that produced it. We show two pitfalls in this methodology: 1. It confounds distinct factors: probe quality and ranking quality. We separate them and draw conclusions on each. 2. It focuses on encoded information, rather than information that is used by the model. We show that these are not the same. We compare two recent ranking methods and a simple one we introduce, and evaluate them with regard to both of these aspects.

Debiasing Methods in Natural Language Understanding Make Bias More Accessible

Model robustness to bias is often determined by the generalization on carefully designed out-of-distribution datasets. Recent debiasing methods in natural language understanding (NLU) improve performance on such datasets by pressuring models into making unbiased predictions. An underlying assumption behind such methods is that this also leads to the discovery of more robust features in the model's inner representations. We propose a general probing-based framework that allows for post-hoc interpretation of biases in language models, and use an information-theoretic approach to measure the extractability of certain biases from the model's representations. We experiment with several NLU datasets and known biases, and show that, counter-intuitively, the more a language model is pushed towards a debiased regime, the more bias is actually encoded in its inner representations.