arXiv subjects

Barbara Plank

Publications and source records attributed to Barbara Plank.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources

arXiv2024

Exploring Large Language Models for Product Attribute Value Identification

Product attribute value identification (PAVI) involves automatically identifying attributes and their values from product information, enabling features like product search, recommendation, and comparison. Existing methods primarily rely on fine-tuning pre-trained language models, such as BART and T5, which require extensive task-specific training data and struggle to generalize to new attributes. This paper explores large language models (LLMs), such as LLaMA and Mistral, as data-efficient and robust alternatives for PAVI. We propose various strategies: comparing one-step and two-step prompt-based approaches in zero-shot settings and utilizing parametric and non-parametric knowledge through in-context learning examples. We also introduce a dense demonstration retriever based on a pre-trained T5 model and perform instruction fine-tuning to explicitly train LLMs on task-specific instructions. Extensive experiments on two product benchmarks show that our two-step approach significantly improves performance in zero-shot settings, and instruction fine-tuning further boosts performance when using training data, demonstrating the practical benefits of using LLMs for PAVI.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Mind the Uncertainty in Human Disagreement: Evaluating Discrepancies between Model Predictions and Human Responses in VQA

Large vision-language models frequently struggle to accurately predict responses provided by multiple human annotators, particularly when those responses exhibit human uncertainty. In this study, we focus on the Visual Question Answering (VQA) task, and we comprehensively evaluate how well the state-of-the-art vision-language models correlate with the distribution of human responses. To do so, we categorize our samples based on their levels (low, medium, high) of human uncertainty in disagreement (HUD) and employ not only accuracy but also three new human-correlated metrics in VQA, to investigate the impact of HUD. To better align models with humans, we also verify the effect of common calibration and human calibration. Our results show that even BEiT3, currently the best model for this task, struggles to capture the multi-label distribution inherent in diverse human responses. Additionally, we observe that the commonly used accuracy-oriented calibration technique adversely affects BEiT3's ability to capture HUD, further widening the gap between model predictions and human distributions. In contrast, we show the benefits of calibrating models towards human distributions for VQA, better aligning model confidence with human uncertainty. Our findings highlight that for VQA, the consistent alignment between human responses and model predictions is understudied and should become the next crucial target of future studies.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2024

Look at the Text: Instruction-Tuned Language Models are More Robust Multiple Choice Selectors than You Think

Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are commonly used to evaluate the capabilities of large language models (LLMs). One common way to evaluate the model response is to rank the candidate answers based on the log probability of the first token prediction. An alternative way is to examine the text output. Prior work has shown that first token probabilities lack robustness to changes in MCQ phrasing, and that first token probabilities do not match text answers for instruction-tuned models. Therefore, in this paper, we investigate the robustness of text answers. We show that the text answers are more robust to question perturbations than the first token probabilities, when the first token answers mismatch the text answers. The difference in robustness increases as the mismatch rate becomes greater. As the mismatch reaches over 50\%, the text answer is more robust to option order changes than the debiased first token probabilities using state-of-the-art debiasing methods such as PriDe. Our findings provide further evidence for the benefits of text answer evaluation over first token probability evaluation.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Beyond Accuracy: Evaluating the Reasoning Behavior of Large Language Models -- A Survey

Large language models (LLMs) have recently shown impressive performance on tasks involving reasoning, leading to a lively debate on whether these models possess reasoning capabilities similar to humans. However, despite these successes, the depth of LLMs' reasoning abilities remains uncertain. This uncertainty partly stems from the predominant focus on task performance, measured through shallow accuracy metrics, rather than a thorough investigation of the models' reasoning behavior. This paper seeks to address this gap by providing a comprehensive review of studies that go beyond task accuracy, offering deeper insights into the models' reasoning processes. Furthermore, we survey prevalent methodologies to evaluate the reasoning behavior of LLMs, emphasizing current trends and efforts towards more nuanced reasoning analyses. Our review suggests that LLMs tend to rely on surface-level patterns and correlations in their training data, rather than on sophisticated reasoning abilities. Additionally, we identify the need for further research that delineates the key differences between human and LLM-based reasoning. Through this survey, we aim to shed light on the complex reasoning processes within LLMs.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

"My Answer is C": First-Token Probabilities Do Not Match Text Answers in Instruction-Tuned Language Models

The open-ended nature of language generation makes the evaluation of autoregressive large language models (LLMs) challenging. One common evaluation approach uses multiple-choice questions (MCQ) to limit the response space. The model is then evaluated by ranking the candidate answers by the log probability of the first token prediction. However, first-tokens may not consistently reflect the final response output, due to model's diverse response styles such as starting with "Sure" or refusing to answer. Consequently, MCQ evaluation is not indicative of model behaviour when interacting with users. But by how much? We evaluate how aligned first-token evaluation is with the text output along several dimensions, namely final option choice, refusal rate, choice distribution and robustness under prompt perturbation. Our results show that the two approaches are severely misaligned on all dimensions, reaching mismatch rates over 60%. Models heavily fine-tuned on conversational or safety data are especially impacted. Crucially, models remain misaligned even when we increasingly constrain prompts, i.e., force them to start with an option letter or example template. Our findings i) underscore the importance of inspecting the text output as well and ii) caution against relying solely on first-token evaluation.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

An Empirical Comparison of Generative Approaches for Product Attribute-Value Identification

Product attributes are crucial for e-commerce platforms, supporting applications like search, recommendation, and question answering. The task of Product Attribute and Value Identification (PAVI) involves identifying both attributes and their values from product information. In this paper, we formulate PAVI as a generation task and provide, to the best of our knowledge, the most comprehensive evaluation of PAVI so far. We compare three different attribute-value generation (AVG) strategies based on fine-tuning encoder-decoder models on three datasets. Experiments show that end-to-end AVG approach, which is computationally efficient, outperforms other strategies. However, there are differences depending on model sizes and the underlying language model. The code to reproduce all experiments is available at: https://github.com/kassemsabeh/pavi-avg

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Universal NER: A Gold-Standard Multilingual Named Entity Recognition Benchmark

We introduce Universal NER (UNER), an open, community-driven project to develop gold-standard NER benchmarks in many languages. The overarching goal of UNER is to provide high-quality, cross-lingually consistent annotations to facilitate and standardize multilingual NER research. UNER v1 contains 18 datasets annotated with named entities in a cross-lingual consistent schema across 12 diverse languages. In this paper, we detail the dataset creation and composition of UNER; we also provide initial modeling baselines on both in-language and cross-lingual learning settings. We release the data, code, and fitted models to the public.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

CLIMATELI: Evaluating Entity Linking on Climate Change Data

Climate Change (CC) is a pressing topic of global importance, attracting increasing attention across research fields, from social sciences to Natural Language Processing (NLP). CC is also discussed in various settings and communication platforms, from academic publications to social media forums. Understanding who and what is mentioned in such data is a first critical step to gaining new insights into CC. We present CLIMATELI (CLIMATe Entity LInking), the first manually annotated CC dataset that links 3,087 entity spans to Wikipedia. Using CLIMATELI (CLIMATe Entity LInking), we evaluate existing entity linking (EL) systems on the CC topic across various genres and propose automated filtering methods for CC entities. We find that the performance of EL models notably lags behind humans at both token and entity levels. Testing within the scope of retaining or excluding non-nominal and/or non-CC entities particularly impacts the models' performances.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

What Do Dialect Speakers Want? A Survey of Attitudes Towards Language Technology for German Dialects

Natural language processing (NLP) has largely focused on modelling standardized languages. More recently, attention has increasingly shifted to local, non-standardized languages and dialects. However, the relevant speaker populations' needs and wishes with respect to NLP tools are largely unknown. In this paper, we focus on dialects and regional languages related to German -- a group of varieties that is heterogeneous in terms of prestige and standardization. We survey speakers of these varieties (N=327) and present their opinions on hypothetical language technologies for their dialects. Although attitudes vary among subgroups of our respondents, we find that respondents are especially in favour of potential NLP tools that work with dialectal input (especially audio input) such as virtual assistants, and less so for applications that produce dialectal output such as machine translation or spellcheckers.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Position: Insights from Survey Methodology can Improve Training Data

Whether future AI models are fair, trustworthy, and aligned with the public's interests rests in part on our ability to collect accurate data about what we want the models to do. However, collecting high-quality data is difficult, and few AI/ML researchers are trained in data collection methods. Recent research in data-centric AI has show that higher quality training data leads to better performing models, making this the right moment to introduce AI/ML researchers to the field of survey methodology, the science of data collection. We summarize insights from the survey methodology literature and discuss how they can improve the quality of training and feedback data. We also suggest collaborative research ideas into how biases in data collection can be mitigated, making models more accurate and human-centric.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Through the Lens of Split Vote: Exploring Disagreement, Difficulty and Calibration in Legal Case Outcome Classification

In legal decisions, split votes (SV) occur when judges cannot reach a unanimous decision, posing a difficulty for lawyers who must navigate diverse legal arguments and opinions. In high-stakes domains, understanding the alignment of perceived difficulty between humans and AI systems is crucial to build trust. However, existing NLP calibration methods focus on a classifier's awareness of predictive performance, measured against the human majority class, overlooking inherent human label variation (HLV). This paper explores split votes as naturally observable human disagreement and value pluralism. We collect judges' vote distributions from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), and present SV-ECHR, a case outcome classification (COC) dataset with SV information. We build a taxonomy of disagreement with SV-specific subcategories. We further assess the alignment of perceived difficulty between models and humans, as well as confidence- and human-calibration of COC models. We observe limited alignment with the judge vote distribution. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic exploration of calibration to human judgements in legal NLP. Our study underscores the necessity for further research on measuring and enhancing model calibration considering HLV in legal decision tasks.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

VariErr NLI: Separating Annotation Error from Human Label Variation

Human label variation arises when annotators assign different labels to the same item for valid reasons, while annotation errors occur when labels are assigned for invalid reasons. These two issues are prevalent in NLP benchmarks, yet existing research has studied them in isolation. To the best of our knowledge, there exists no prior work that focuses on teasing apart error from signal, especially in cases where signal is beyond black-and-white. To fill this gap, we introduce a systematic methodology and a new dataset, VariErr (variation versus error), focusing on the NLI task in English. We propose a 2-round annotation procedure with annotators explaining each label and subsequently judging the validity of label-explanation pairs. VariErr contains 7,732 validity judgments on 1,933 explanations for 500 re-annotated MNLI items. We assess the effectiveness of various automatic error detection (AED) methods and GPTs in uncovering errors versus human label variation. We find that state-of-the-art AED methods significantly underperform GPTs and humans. While GPT-4 is the best system, it still falls short of human performance. Our methodology is applicable beyond NLI, offering fertile ground for future research on error versus plausible variation, which in turn can yield better and more trustworthy NLP systems.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Comparing Inferential Strategies of Humans and Large Language Models in Deductive Reasoning

Deductive reasoning plays a pivotal role in the formulation of sound and cohesive arguments. It allows individuals to draw conclusions that logically follow, given the truth value of the information provided. Recent progress in the domain of large language models (LLMs) has showcased their capability in executing deductive reasoning tasks. Nonetheless, a significant portion of research primarily assesses the accuracy of LLMs in solving such tasks, often overlooking a deeper analysis of their reasoning behavior. In this study, we draw upon principles from cognitive psychology to examine inferential strategies employed by LLMs, through a detailed evaluation of their responses to propositional logic problems. Our findings indicate that LLMs display reasoning patterns akin to those observed in humans, including strategies like $\textit{supposition following}$ or $\textit{chain construction}$. Moreover, our research demonstrates that the architecture and scale of the model significantly affect its preferred method of reasoning, with more advanced models tending to adopt strategies more frequently than less sophisticated ones. Importantly, we assert that a model's accuracy, that is the correctness of its final conclusion, does not necessarily reflect the validity of its reasoning process. This distinction underscores the necessity for more nuanced evaluation procedures in the field.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

How to Encode Domain Information in Relation Classification

Current language models require a lot of training data to obtain high performance. For Relation Classification (RC), many datasets are domain-specific, so combining datasets to obtain better performance is non-trivial. We explore a multi-domain training setup for RC, and attempt to improve performance by encoding domain information. Our proposed models improve > 2 Macro-F1 against the baseline setup, and our analysis reveals that not all the labels benefit the same: The classes which occupy a similar space across domains (i.e., their interpretation is close across them, for example "physical") benefit the least, while domain-dependent relations (e.g., "part-of'') improve the most when encoding domain information.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

MaiNLP at SemEval-2024 Task 1: Analyzing Source Language Selection in Cross-Lingual Textual Relatedness

This paper presents our system developed for the SemEval-2024 Task 1: Semantic Textual Relatedness (STR), on Track C: Cross-lingual. The task aims to detect semantic relatedness of two sentences in a given target language without access to direct supervision (i.e. zero-shot cross-lingual transfer). To this end, we focus on different source language selection strategies on two different pre-trained languages models: XLM-R and Furina. We experiment with 1) single-source transfer and select source languages based on typological similarity, 2) augmenting English training data with the two nearest-neighbor source languages, and 3) multi-source transfer where we compare selecting on all training languages against languages from the same family. We further study machine translation-based data augmentation and the impact of script differences. Our submission achieved the first place in the C8 (Kinyarwanda) test set.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Sebastian, Basti, Wastl?! Recognizing Named Entities in Bavarian Dialectal Data

Named Entity Recognition (NER) is a fundamental task to extract key information from texts, but annotated resources are scarce for dialects. This paper introduces the first dialectal NER dataset for German, BarNER, with 161K tokens annotated on Bavarian Wikipedia articles (bar-wiki) and tweets (bar-tweet), using a schema adapted from German CoNLL 2006 and GermEval. The Bavarian dialect differs from standard German in lexical distribution, syntactic construction, and entity information. We conduct in-domain, cross-domain, sequential, and joint experiments on two Bavarian and three German corpora and present the first comprehensive NER results on Bavarian. Incorporating knowledge from the larger German NER (sub-)datasets notably improves on bar-wiki and moderately on bar-tweet. Inversely, training first on Bavarian contributes slightly to the seminal German CoNLL 2006 corpus. Moreover, with gold dialect labels on Bavarian tweets, we assess multi-task learning between five NER and two Bavarian-German dialect identification tasks and achieve NER SOTA on bar-wiki. We substantiate the necessity of our low-resource BarNER corpus and the importance of diversity in dialects, genres, and topics in enhancing model performance.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

MaiBaam: A Multi-Dialectal Bavarian Universal Dependency Treebank

Despite the success of the Universal Dependencies (UD) project exemplified by its impressive language breadth, there is still a lack in `within-language breadth': most treebanks focus on standard languages. Even for German, the language with the most annotations in UD, so far no treebank exists for one of its language varieties spoken by over 10M people: Bavarian. To contribute to closing this gap, we present the first multi-dialect Bavarian treebank (MaiBaam) manually annotated with part-of-speech and syntactic dependency information in UD, covering multiple text genres (wiki, fiction, grammar examples, social, non-fiction). We highlight the morphosyntactic differences between the closely-related Bavarian and German and showcase the rich variability of speakers' orthographies. Our corpus includes 15k tokens, covering dialects from all Bavarian-speaking areas spanning three countries. We provide baseline parsing and POS tagging results, which are lower than results obtained on German and vary substantially between different graph-based parsers. To support further research on Bavarian syntax, we make our dataset, language-specific guidelines and code publicly available.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Interpreting Predictive Probabilities: Model Confidence or Human Label Variation?

With the rise of increasingly powerful and user-facing NLP systems, there is growing interest in assessing whether they have a good representation of uncertainty by evaluating the quality of their predictive distribution over outcomes. We identify two main perspectives that drive starkly different evaluation protocols. The first treats predictive probability as an indication of model confidence; the second as an indication of human label variation. We discuss their merits and limitations, and take the position that both are crucial for trustworthy and fair NLP systems, but that exploiting a single predictive distribution is limiting. We recommend tools and highlight exciting directions towards models with disentangled representations of uncertainty about predictions and uncertainty about human labels.

cs.CL↗