Non-compositional expressions, by virtue of their non-compositionality, are a classic ‘pain in the neck’ for NLP systems. Different from the general language modeling and generation tasks that are primarily compositional, generating non-compositional expressions is more challenging for current neural models, including large pre-trained language models. The main reasons are 1) their non-compositionality, and 2) the limited data resources. Therefore, to make the best use of available data for modeling non-compositionality, we propose a dynamic curriculum learning framework, which learns training examples from easy ones to harder ones thus optimizing the learning step by step but suffers from the forgetting problem. To alleviate the forgetting problem brought by the arrangement of training examples, we also apply a continual learning method into our curriculum learning framework. Our proposed method combined curriculum and continual learning, to gradually improve the model’s performance on the task of non-compositional expression generation. Experiments on idiomatic expression generation and metaphor generation affirm the effectiveness of our proposed curriculum learning framework and the application of continual learning. Our codes are available at https://github.com/zhjjn/CL2Gen.git.
more »
« less
Unified Representation for Non-compositional and Compositional Expressions
Accurate processing of non-compositional language relies on generating good representations for such expressions. In this work, we study the representation of language non-compositionality by proposing a language model, PIER+, that builds on BART and can create semantically meaningful and contextually appropriate representations for English potentially idiomatic expressions (PIEs). PIEs are characterized by their non-compositionality and contextual ambiguity in their literal and idiomatic interpretations. Via intrinsic evaluation on embedding quality and extrinsic evaluation on PIE processing and NLU tasks, we show that representations generated by PIER+ result in 33% higher homogeneity score for embedding clustering than BART, whereas 3.12% and 3.29% gains in accuracy and sequence accuracy for PIE sense classification and span detection compared to the state-of-the-art IE representation model, GIEA. These gains are achieved without sacrificing PIER+’s performance on NLU tasks (+/- 1% accuracy) compared to BART.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10496730
- Publisher / Repository:
- Association for Computational Linguistics
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 11696 to 11710
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Singapore
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)External knowledge is often useful for natural language understanding tasks. We introduce a contextual text representation model called Conceptual-Contextual (CC) embeddings, which incorporates structured knowledge into text representations. Unlike entity embedding methods, our approach encodes a knowledge graph into a context model. CC embeddings can be easily reused for a wide range of tasks in a similar fashion to pre-trained language models. Our model effectively encodes the huge UMLS database by leveraging semantic generalizability. Experiments on electronic health records (EHRs) and medical text processing benchmarks showed our model gives a major boost to the performance of supervised medical NLP tasks.more » « less
-
A key property of human cognition is its ability to generate novel predictions about unfamiliar situations by completing a partially-specified relation or an analogy. Here, we present a computational model capable of producing generative inferences from relations and analogs. This model, BART-Gen, operates on explicit representations of relations learned by BART (Bayesian Analogy with Relational Transformations), to achieve two related forms of generative inference: reasoning from a single relation, and reasoning from an analog. In the first form, a reasoner completes a partially-specified instance of a stated relation (e.g., robin is a type of ____). In the second, a reasoner completes a target analog based on a stated source analog (e.g., sedan:car :: robin:____). We compare the performance of BART-Gen with that of BERT, a popular model for Natural Language Processing (NLP) that is trained on sentence completion tasks and that does not rely on explicit representations of relations. Across simulations and human experiments, we show that BART-Gen produces more human-like responses for generative inferences from relations and analogs than does the NLP model. These results demonstrate the essential role of explicit relation representations in human generative reasoning.more » « less
-
ImportanceLarge language models (LLMs) can assist in various health care activities, but current evaluation approaches may not adequately identify the most useful application areas. ObjectiveTo summarize existing evaluations of LLMs in health care in terms of 5 components: (1) evaluation data type, (2) health care task, (3) natural language processing (NLP) and natural language understanding (NLU) tasks, (4) dimension of evaluation, and (5) medical specialty. Data SourcesA systematic search of PubMed and Web of Science was performed for studies published between January 1, 2022, and February 19, 2024. Study SelectionStudies evaluating 1 or more LLMs in health care. Data Extraction and SynthesisThree independent reviewers categorized studies via keyword searches based on the data used, the health care tasks, the NLP and NLU tasks, the dimensions of evaluation, and the medical specialty. ResultsOf 519 studies reviewed, published between January 1, 2022, and February 19, 2024, only 5% used real patient care data for LLM evaluation. The most common health care tasks were assessing medical knowledge such as answering medical licensing examination questions (44.5%) and making diagnoses (19.5%). Administrative tasks such as assigning billing codes (0.2%) and writing prescriptions (0.2%) were less studied. For NLP and NLU tasks, most studies focused on question answering (84.2%), while tasks such as summarization (8.9%) and conversational dialogue (3.3%) were infrequent. Almost all studies (95.4%) used accuracy as the primary dimension of evaluation; fairness, bias, and toxicity (15.8%), deployment considerations (4.6%), and calibration and uncertainty (1.2%) were infrequently measured. Finally, in terms of medical specialty area, most studies were in generic health care applications (25.6%), internal medicine (16.4%), surgery (11.4%), and ophthalmology (6.9%), with nuclear medicine (0.6%), physical medicine (0.4%), and medical genetics (0.2%) being the least represented. Conclusions and RelevanceExisting evaluations of LLMs mostly focus on accuracy of question answering for medical examinations, without consideration of real patient care data. Dimensions such as fairness, bias, and toxicity and deployment considerations received limited attention. Future evaluations should adopt standardized applications and metrics, use clinical data, and broaden focus to include a wider range of tasks and specialties.more » « less
-
Che, Wanxiang; Nabende, Joyce; Shutova, Ekaterina; Pilehvar, Mohammad Taher (Ed.)Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have made rapid progress in reasoning across visual and textual data. While VLMs perform well on vision tasks that they are trained on, our results highlight key challenges in abstract pattern recognition. We present GlyphPattern, a 954 item dataset that pairs 318 human-written descriptions of visual patterns from 40 writing systems with three visual presentation styles.GlyphPattern evaluates abstract pattern recognition in VLMs, requiring models to understand and judge natural language descriptions of visual patterns. GlyphPattern patterns are drawn from a large-scale cognitive science investigation of human writing systems; as a result, they are rich in spatial reference and compositionality. Our experiments show that GlyphPattern is challenging for state-of-the-art VLMs (GPT-4o achieves only 55% accuracy), with marginal gains from few-shot prompting. Our detailed analysis reveals errors at multiple levels, including visual processing, natural language understanding, and pattern generalization.more » « less
An official website of the United States government

