ymoslem/acl-abstracts huggingface dataset:
More Diverse Dialogue Datasets via Diversity-Informed Data Collection (2020)

Automated generation of conversational dialogue using modern neural architectures has made notable advances. However, these models are known to have a drawback of often producing uninteresting, predictable responses; this is known as the diversity problem. We introduce a new strategy to address this problem, called Diversity-Informed Data Collection. Unlike prior approaches, which modify model architectures to solve the problem, this method uses dynamically computed corpus-level statistics to determine which conversational participants to collect data from. Diversity-Informed Data Collection produces significantly more diverse data than baseline data collection methods, and better results on two downstream tasks: emotion classification and dialogue generation. This method is generalizable and can be used with other corpus-level metrics.
S2ORC: The Semantic Scholar Open Research Corpus (2020)

We introduce S2ORC, a large corpus of 81.1M English-language academic papers spanning many academic disciplines. The corpus consists of rich metadata, paper abstracts, resolved bibliographic references, as well as structured full text for 8.1M open access papers. Full text is annotated with automatically-detected inline mentions of citations, figures, and tables, each linked to their corresponding paper objects. In S2ORC, we aggregate papers from hundreds of academic publishers and digital archives into a unified source, and create the largest publicly-available collection of machine-readable academic text to date. We hope this resource will facilitate research and development of tools and tasks for text mining over academic text.
Tangled up in BLEU: Reevaluating the Evaluation of Automatic Machine Translation Evaluation Metrics (2020)

Automatic metrics are fundamental for the development and evaluation of machine translation systems. Judging whether, and to what extent, automatic metrics concur with the gold standard of human evaluation is not a straightforward problem. We show that current methods for judging metrics are highly sensitive to the translations used for assessment, particularly the presence of outliers, which often leads to falsely confident conclusions about a metric`s efficacy. Finally, we turn to pairwise system ranking, developing a method for thresholding performance improvement under an automatic metric against human judgements, which allows quantification of type I versus type II errors incurred, i.e., insignificant human differences in system quality that are accepted, and significant human differences that are rejected. Together, these findings suggest improvements to the protocols for metric evaluation and system performance evaluation in machine translation.
A Transformer-based Approach for Source Code Summarization (2020)

Generating a readable summary that describes the functionality of a program is known as source code summarization. In this task, learning code representation by modeling the pairwise relationship between code tokens to capture their long-range dependencies is crucial. To learn code representation for summarization, we explore the Transformer model that uses a self-attention mechanism and has shown to be effective in capturing long-range dependencies. In this work, we show that despite the approach is simple, it outperforms the state-of-the-art techniques by a significant margin. We perform extensive analysis and ablation studies that reveal several important findings, e.g., the absolute encoding of source code tokens' position hinders, while relative encoding significantly improves the summarization performance. We have made our code publicly available to facilitate future research.
Asking and Answering Questions to Evaluate the Factual Consistency of Summaries (2020)

Practical applications of abstractive summarization models are limited by frequent factual inconsistencies with respect to their input. Existing automatic evaluation metrics for summarization are largely insensitive to such errors. We propose QAGS (pronounced {\textquotedblleft}kags{\textquotedblright}), an automatic evaluation protocol that is designed to identify factual inconsistencies in a generated summary. QAGS is based on the intuition that if we ask questions about a summary and its source, we will receive similar answers if the summary is factually consistent with the source. To evaluate QAGS, we collect human judgments of factual consistency on model-generated summaries for the CNN/DailyMail (Hermann et al., 2015) and XSUM (Narayan et al., 2018) summarization datasets. QAGS has substantially higher correlations with these judgments than other automatic evaluation metrics. Also, QAGS offers a natural form of interpretability: The answers and questions generated while computing QAGS indicate which tokens of a summary are inconsistent and why. We believe QAGS is a promising tool in automatically generating usable and factually consistent text. Code for QAGS will be available at \url{https://github.com/W4ngatang/qags}.
Discourse-Aware Neural Extractive Text Summarization (2020)

Recently BERT has been adopted for document encoding in state-of-the-art text summarization models. However, sentence-based extractive models often result in redundant or uninformative phrases in the extracted summaries. Also, long-range dependencies throughout a document are not well captured by BERT, which is pre-trained on sentence pairs instead of documents. To address these issues, we present a discourse-aware neural summarization model - DiscoBert. DiscoBert extracts sub-sentential discourse units (instead of sentences) as candidates for extractive selection on a finer granularity. To capture the long-range dependencies among discourse units, structural discourse graphs are constructed based on RST trees and coreference mentions, encoded with Graph Convolutional Networks. Experiments show that the proposed model outperforms state-of-the-art methods by a significant margin on popular summarization benchmarks compared to other BERT-base models.
Discrete Optimization for Unsupervised Sentence Summarization with Word-Level Extraction (2020)

Automatic sentence summarization produces a shorter version of a sentence, while preserving its most important information. A good summary is characterized by language fluency and high information overlap with the source sentence. We model these two aspects in an unsupervised objective function, consisting of language modeling and semantic similarity metrics. We search for a high-scoring summary by discrete optimization. Our proposed method achieves a new state-of-the art for unsupervised sentence summarization according to ROUGE scores. Additionally, we demonstrate that the commonly reported ROUGE F1 metric is sensitive to summary length. Since this is unwillingly exploited in recent work, we emphasize that future evaluation should explicitly group summarization systems by output length brackets.
Exploring Content Selection in Summarization of Novel Chapters (2020)

We present a new summarization task, generating summaries of novel chapters using summary/chapter pairs from online study guides. This is a harder task than the news summarization task, given the chapter length as well as the extreme paraphrasing and generalization found in the summaries. We focus on extractive summarization, which requires the creation of a gold-standard set of extractive summaries. We present a new metric for aligning reference summary sentences with chapter sentences to create gold extracts and also experiment with different alignment methods. Our experiments demonstrate significant improvement over prior alignment approaches for our task as shown through automatic metrics and a crowd-sourced pyramid analysis.
FEQA: A Question Answering Evaluation Framework for Faithfulness Assessment in Abstractive Summarization (2020)

Neural abstractive summarization models are prone to generate content inconsistent with the source document, i.e. unfaithful. Existing automatic metrics do not capture such mistakes effectively. We tackle the problem of evaluating faithfulness of a generated summary given its source document. We first collected human annotations of faithfulness for outputs from numerous models on two datasets. We find that current models exhibit a trade-off between abstractiveness and faithfulness: outputs with less word overlap with the source document are more likely to be unfaithful. Next, we propose an automatic question answering (QA) based metric for faithfulness, FEQA, which leverages recent advances in reading comprehension. Given question-answer pairs generated from the summary, a QA model extracts answers from the document; non-matched answers indicate unfaithful information in the summary. Among metrics based on word overlap, embedding similarity, and learned language understanding models, our QA-based metric has significantly higher correlation with human faithfulness scores, especially on highly abstractive summaries.
Fact-based Content Weighting for Evaluating Abstractive Summarisation (2020)

Abstractive summarisation is notoriously hard to evaluate since standard word-overlap-based metrics are insufficient. We introduce a new evaluation metric which is based on fact-level content weighting, i.e. relating the facts of the document to the facts of the summary. We fol- low the assumption that a good summary will reflect all relevant facts, i.e. the ones present in the ground truth (human-generated refer- ence summary). We confirm this hypothe- sis by showing that our weightings are highly correlated to human perception and compare favourably to the recent manual highlight- based metric of Hardy et al. (2019).
Hooks in the Headline: Learning to Generate Headlines with Controlled Styles (2020)

Current summarization systems only produce plain, factual headlines, far from the practical needs for the exposure and memorableness of the articles. We propose a new task, Stylistic Headline Generation (SHG), to enrich the headlines with three style options (humor, romance and clickbait), thus attracting more readers. With no style-specific article-headline pair (only a standard headline summarization dataset and mono-style corpora), our method TitleStylist generates stylistic headlines by combining the summarization and reconstruction tasks into a multitasking framework. We also introduced a novel parameter sharing scheme to further disentangle the style from text. Through both automatic and human evaluation, we demonstrate that TitleStylist can generate relevant, fluent headlines with three target styles: humor, romance, and clickbait. The attraction score of our model generated headlines outperforms the state-of-the-art summarization model by 9.68{\%}, even outperforming human-written references.
Knowledge Graph-Augmented Abstractive Summarization with Semantic-Driven Cloze Reward (2020)

Sequence-to-sequence models for abstractive summarization have been studied extensively, yet the generated summaries commonly suffer from fabricated content, and are often found to be near-extractive. We argue that, to address these issues, the summarizer should acquire semantic interpretation over input, e.g., via structured representation, to allow the generation of more informative summaries. In this paper, we present ASGARD, a novel framework for Abstractive Summarization with Graph-Augmentation and semantic-driven RewarD. We propose the use of dual encoders{---}a sequential document encoder and a graph-structured encoder{---}to maintain the global context and local characteristics of entities, complementing each other. We further design a reward based on a multiple choice cloze test to drive the model to better capture entity interactions. Results show that our models produce significantly higher ROUGE scores than a variant without knowledge graph as input on both New York Times and CNN/Daily Mail datasets. We also obtain better or comparable performance compared to systems that are fine-tuned from large pretrained language models. Human judges further rate our model outputs as more informative and containing fewer unfaithful errors.
Optimizing the Factual Correctness of a Summary: A Study of Summarizing Radiology Reports (2020)

Neural abstractive summarization models are able to generate summaries which have high overlap with human references. However, existing models are not optimized for factual correctness, a critical metric in real-world applications. In this work, we develop a general framework where we evaluate the factual correctness of a generated summary by fact-checking it automatically against its reference using an information extraction module. We further propose a training strategy which optimizes a neural summarization model with a factual correctness reward via reinforcement learning. We apply the proposed method to the summarization of radiology reports, where factual correctness is a key requirement. On two separate datasets collected from hospitals, we show via both automatic and human evaluation that the proposed approach substantially improves the factual correctness and overall quality of outputs over a competitive neural summarization system, producing radiology summaries that approach the quality of human-authored ones.
Storytelling with Dialogue: A Critical Role Dungeons and Dragons Dataset (2020)

This paper describes the Critical Role Dungeons and Dragons Dataset (CRD3) and related analyses. Critical Role is an unscripted, live-streamed show where a fixed group of people play Dungeons and Dragons, an open-ended role-playing game. The dataset is collected from 159 Critical Role episodes transcribed to text dialogues, consisting of 398,682 turns. It also includes corresponding abstractive summaries collected from the Fandom wiki. The dataset is linguistically unique in that the narratives are generated entirely through player collaboration and spoken interaction. For each dialogue, there are a large number of turns, multiple abstractive summaries with varying levels of detail, and semantic ties to the previous dialogues. In addition, we provide a data augmentation method that produces 34,243 summary-dialogue chunk pairs to support current neural ML approaches, and we provide an abstractive summarization benchmark and evaluation.
The Summary Loop: Learning to Write Abstractive Summaries Without Examples (2020)

This work presents a new approach to unsupervised abstractive summarization based on maximizing a combination of coverage and fluency for a given length constraint. It introduces a novel method that encourages the inclusion of key terms from the original document into the summary: key terms are masked out of the original document and must be filled in by a coverage model using the current generated summary. A novel unsupervised training procedure leverages this coverage model along with a fluency model to generate and score summaries. When tested on popular news summarization datasets, the method outperforms previous unsupervised methods by more than 2 R-1 points, and approaches results of competitive supervised methods. Our model attains higher levels of abstraction with copied passages roughly two times shorter than prior work, and learns to compress and merge sentences without supervision.
Unsupervised Opinion Summarization as Copycat-Review Generation (2020)

Opinion summarization is the task of automatically creating summaries that reflect subjective information expressed in multiple documents, such as product reviews. While the majority of previous work has focused on the extractive setting, i.e., selecting fragments from input reviews to produce a summary, we let the model generate novel sentences and hence produce abstractive summaries. Recent progress in summarization has seen the development of supervised models which rely on large quantities of document-summary pairs. Since such training data is expensive to acquire, we instead consider the unsupervised setting, in other words, we do not use any summaries in training. We define a generative model for a review collection which capitalizes on the intuition that when generating a new review given a set of other reviews of a product, we should be able to control the {\textquotedblleft}amount of novelty{\textquotedblright} going into the new review or, equivalently, vary the extent to which it deviates from the input. At test time, when generating summaries, we force the novelty to be minimal, and produce a text reflecting consensus opinions. We capture this intuition by defining a hierarchical variational autoencoder model. Both individual reviews and the products they correspond to are associated with stochastic latent codes, and the review generator ({\textquotedblleft}decoder{\textquotedblright}) has direct access to the text of input reviews through the pointer-generator mechanism. Experiments on Amazon and Yelp datasets, show that setting at test time the review`s latent code to its mean, allows the model to produce fluent and coherent summaries reflecting common opinions.
(Re)construing Meaning in NLP (2020)

Human speakers have an extensive toolkit of ways to express themselves. In this paper, we engage with an idea largely absent from discussions of meaning in natural language understanding{---}namely, that the way something is expressed reflects different ways of conceptualizing or construing the information being conveyed. We first define this phenomenon more precisely, drawing on considerable prior work in theoretical cognitive semantics and psycholinguistics. We then survey some dimensions of construed meaning and show how insights from construal could inform theoretical and practical work in NLP.
Climbing towards NLU: On Meaning, Form, and Understanding in the Age of Data (2020)

The success of the large neural language models on many NLP tasks is exciting. However, we find that these successes sometimes lead to hype in which these models are being described as {\textquotedblleft}understanding{\textquotedblright} language or capturing {\textquotedblleft}meaning{\textquotedblright}. In this position paper, we argue that a system trained only on form has a priori no way to learn meaning. In keeping with the ACL 2020 theme of {\textquotedblleft}Taking Stock of Where We`ve Been and Where We`re Going{\textquotedblright}, we argue that a clear understanding of the distinction between form and meaning will help guide the field towards better science around natural language understanding.
Examining Citations of Natural Language Processing Literature (2020)

We extracted information from the ACL Anthology (AA) and Google Scholar (GS) to examine trends in citations of NLP papers. We explore questions such as: how well cited are papers of different types (journal articles, conference papers, demo papers, etc.)? how well cited are papers from different areas of within NLP? etc. Notably, we show that only about 56{\%} of the papers in AA are cited ten or more times. CL Journal has the most cited papers, but its citation dominance has lessened in recent years. On average, long papers get almost three times as many citations as short papers; and papers on sentiment classification, anaphora resolution, and entity recognition have the highest median citations. The analyses presented here, and the associated dataset of NLP papers mapped to citations, have a number of uses including: understanding how the field is growing and quantifying the impact of different types of papers.
How Can We Accelerate Progress Towards Human-like Linguistic Generalization? (2020)

This position paper describes and critiques the Pretraining-Agnostic Identically Distributed (PAID) evaluation paradigm, which has become a central tool for measuring progress in natural language understanding. This paradigm consists of three stages: (1) pre-training of a word prediction model on a corpus of arbitrary size; (2) fine-tuning (transfer learning) on a training set representing a classification task; (3) evaluation on a test set drawn from the same distribution as that training set. This paradigm favors simple, low-bias architectures, which, first, can be scaled to process vast amounts of data, and second, can capture the fine-grained statistical properties of a particular data set, regardless of whether those properties are likely to generalize to examples of the task outside the data set. This contrasts with humans, who learn language from several orders of magnitude less data than the systems favored by this evaluation paradigm, and generalize to new tasks in a consistent way. We advocate for supplementing or replacing PAID with paradigms that reward architectures that generalize as quickly and robustly as humans.
How Does NLP Benefit Legal System: A Summary of Legal Artificial Intelligence (2020)

Legal Artificial Intelligence (LegalAI) focuses on applying the technology of artificial intelligence, especially natural language processing, to benefit tasks in the legal domain. In recent years, LegalAI has drawn increasing attention rapidly from both AI researchers and legal professionals, as LegalAI is beneficial to the legal system for liberating legal professionals from a maze of paperwork. Legal professionals often think about how to solve tasks from rule-based and symbol-based methods, while NLP researchers concentrate more on data-driven and embedding methods. In this paper, we introduce the history, the current state, and the future directions of research in LegalAI. We illustrate the tasks from the perspectives of legal professionals and NLP researchers and show several representative applications in LegalAI. We conduct experiments and provide an in-depth analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of existing works to explore possible future directions. You can find the implementation of our work from \url{https://github.com/thunlp/CLAIM}.
Intermediate-Task Transfer Learning with Pretrained Language Models: When and Why Does It Work? (2020)

While pretrained models such as BERT have shown large gains across natural language understanding tasks, their performance can be improved by further training the model on a data-rich intermediate task, before fine-tuning it on a target task. However, it is still poorly understood when and why intermediate-task training is beneficial for a given target task. To investigate this, we perform a large-scale study on the pretrained RoBERTa model with 110 intermediate-target task combinations. We further evaluate all trained models with 25 probing tasks meant to reveal the specific skills that drive transfer. We observe that intermediate tasks requiring high-level inference and reasoning abilities tend to work best. We also observe that target task performance is strongly correlated with higher-level abilities such as coreference resolution. However, we fail to observe more granular correlations between probing and target task performance, highlighting the need for further work on broad-coverage probing benchmarks. We also observe evidence that the forgetting of knowledge learned during pretraining may limit our analysis, highlighting the need for further work on transfer learning methods in these settings.
Predictive Biases in Natural Language Processing Models: A Conceptual Framework and Overview (2020)

An increasing number of natural language processing papers address the effect of bias on predictions, introducing mitigation techniques at different parts of the standard NLP pipeline (data and models). However, these works have been conducted individually, without a unifying framework to organize efforts within the field. This situation leads to repetitive approaches, and focuses overly on bias symptoms/effects, rather than on their origins, which could limit the development of effective countermeasures. In this paper, we propose a unifying predictive bias framework for NLP. We summarize the NLP literature and suggest general mathematical definitions of predictive bias. We differentiate two consequences of bias: outcome disparities and error disparities, as well as four potential origins of biases: label bias, selection bias, model overamplification, and semantic bias. Our framework serves as an overview of predictive bias in NLP, integrating existing work into a single structure, and providing a conceptual baseline for improved frameworks.