user: text: Write a concise one-sentence TLDR summary of the scientific paper content below.

Title: Measuring Compositional Generalization: A Comprehensive Method on Realistic Data

Paper content:
State-of-the-art machine learning methods exhibit limited compositional generalization.
At the same time, there is a lack of realistic benchmarks that comprehensively measure this ability, which makes it challenging to find and evaluate improvements.
We introduce a novel method to systematically construct such benchmarks by maximizing compound divergence while guaranteeing a small atom divergence between train and test sets, and we quantitatively compare this method to other approaches for creating compositional generalization benchmarks.
We present a large and realistic natural language question answering dataset that is constructed according to this method, and we use it to analyze the compositional generalization ability of three machine learning architectures.
We find that they fail to generalize compositionally and that there is a surprisingly strong negative correlation between compound divergence and accuracy.
We also demonstrate how our method can be used to create new compositionality benchmarks on top of the existing SCAN dataset, which confirms these findings.
Human intelligence exhibits systematic compositionality (Fodor & Pylyshyn, 1988) , the capacity to understand and produce a potentially infinite number of novel combinations of known components, i.e., to make "infinite use of finite means" (Chomsky, 1965) .
In the context of learning from a set of training examples, we can observe compositionality as compositional generalization, which we take to mean the ability to systematically generalize to composed test examples of a certain distribution after being exposed to the necessary components during training on a different distribution.
Humans demonstrate this ability in many different domains, such as natural language understanding (NLU) and visual scene understanding.
For example, we can learn the meaning of a new word and then apply it to other language contexts.
As Lake & Baroni (2018) put it: "Once a person learns the meaning of a new verb 'dax', he or she can immediately understand the meaning of 'dax twice' and 'sing and dax'."
Similarly, we can learn a new object shape and then understand its compositions with previously learned colors or materials (Johnson et al., 2017; Higgins et al., 2018) .
In contrast, state-of-the-art machine learning (ML) methods often fail to capture the compositional structure that is underlying the problem domain and thus fail to generalize compositionally Bastings et al., 2018; Loula et al., 2018; Russin et al., 2019; Johnson et al., 2017) .
We believe that part of the reason for this shortcoming is a lack of realistic benchmarks that comprehensively measure this aspect of learning in realistic scenarios.
As others have proposed, compositional generalization can be assessed using a train-test split based on observable properties of the examples that intuitively correlate with their underlying compositional structure.
Finegan-Dollak et al. (2018) , for example, propose to test on different output patterns than are in the train set, while propose, among others, to split examples by output length or to test on examples containing primitives that are rarely shown during training.
In this paper, we formalize and generalize this intuition and make these contributions:
• We introduce distribution-based compositionality assessment (DBCA), which is a novel method to quantitatively assess the adequacy of a particular dataset split for measuring compositional generalization and to construct splits that are ideally suited for this purpose (Section 2).
• We present the Compositional Freebase Questions (CFQ) 1 , a simple yet realistic and large NLU dataset that is specifically designed to measure compositional generalization using the DBCA method, and we describe how to construct such a dataset (Section 3).
• We use the DBCA method to construct a series of experiments for measuring compositionality on CFQ and SCAN and to quantitatively compare these experiments to other compositionality experiments (Section 4).
• We analyze the performance of three baseline ML architectures on these experiments and show that these architectures fail to generalize compositionally, and perhaps more surprisingly, that compound divergence between train and test sets is a good predictor of the test accuracy (Section 5).
In this paper we presented what is (to the best of our knowledge) the largest and most comprehensive benchmark for compositional generalization on a realistic NLU task.
It is based on a new dataset generated via a principled rule-based approach and a new method of splitting the dataset by optimizing the divergence of atom and compound distributions between train and test sets.
The performance of three baselines indicates that in a simple but realistic NLU scenario, state-of-the-art learning systems fail to generalize compositionally even if they are provided with large amounts of training data and that the mean accuracy is strongly correlated with the compound divergence.
We hope our work will inspire others to use this benchmark as a yardstick to advance the compositional generalization capabilities of learning systems and achieve high accuracy at high compound divergence.
Some specific directions that we consider promising include applying unsupervised pretraining on the input language or output queries and the use of more diverse or more targeted learning architectures, such as syntactic attention (Russin et al., 2019) .
We also believe it would be interesting to apply the DBCA approach to other domains such as visual reasoning, e.g. based on CLEVR (Johnson et al., 2017) .
In the area of compositionality benchmarks, we are interested in determining the performance of current architectures on the end-to-end task that expects a natural language answer given a natural language question in CFQ.
We would like also to extend our approach to broader subsets of language understanding, including use of ambiguous constructs, negations, quantification, comparatives, additional languages, and other vertical domains.

assistant: text: Benchmark and method to measure compositional generalization by maximizing divergence of compound frequency at small divergence of atom frequency.