Prompting Contrastive Explanations for Commonsense Reasoning Tasks
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2106.06823v1
- Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2021 17:06:13 GMT
- Title: Prompting Contrastive Explanations for Commonsense Reasoning Tasks
- Authors: Bhargavi Paranjape, Julian Michael, Marjan Ghazvininejad, Luke
Zettlemoyer and Hannaneh Hajishirzi
- Abstract summary: Large pretrained language models (PLMs) can achieve near-human performance on commonsense reasoning tasks.
We show how to use these same models to generate human-interpretable evidence.
- Score: 74.7346558082693
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Many commonsense reasoning NLP tasks involve choosing between one or more
possible answers to a question or prompt based on knowledge that is often
implicit. Large pretrained language models (PLMs) can achieve near-human
performance on such tasks, while providing little human-interpretable evidence
of the underlying reasoning they use. In this work, we show how to use these
same models to generate such evidence: inspired by the contrastive nature of
human explanations, we use PLMs to complete explanation prompts which contrast
alternatives according to the key attribute(s) required to justify the correct
answer (for example, peanuts are usually salty while raisins are sweet).
Conditioning model decisions on these explanations improves performance on two
commonsense reasoning benchmarks, as compared to previous non-contrastive
alternatives. These explanations are also judged by humans to be more relevant
for solving the task, and facilitate a novel method to evaluate explanation
faithfulfness.
Related papers
- Evaluating the Reliability of Self-Explanations in Large Language Models [2.8894038270224867]
We evaluate two kinds of such self-explanations - extractive and counterfactual.
Our findings reveal, that, while these self-explanations can correlate with human judgement, they do not fully and accurately follow the model's decision process.
We show that this gap can be bridged because prompting LLMs for counterfactual explanations can produce faithful, informative, and easy-to-verify results.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-19T17:41:08Z) - Evaluating the Utility of Model Explanations for Model Development [54.23538543168767]
We evaluate whether explanations can improve human decision-making in practical scenarios of machine learning model development.
To our surprise, we did not find evidence of significant improvement on tasks when users were provided with any of the saliency maps.
These findings suggest caution regarding the usefulness and potential for misunderstanding in saliency-based explanations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-10T23:13:23Z) - UNcommonsense Reasoning: Abductive Reasoning about Uncommon Situations [62.71847873326847]
We investigate the ability to model unusual, unexpected, and unlikely situations.
Given a piece of context with an unexpected outcome, this task requires reasoning abductively to generate an explanation.
We release a new English language corpus called UNcommonsense.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-14T19:00:55Z) - Abductive Commonsense Reasoning Exploiting Mutually Exclusive
Explanations [118.0818807474809]
Abductive reasoning aims to find plausible explanations for an event.
Existing approaches for abductive reasoning in natural language processing often rely on manually generated annotations for supervision.
This work proposes an approach for abductive commonsense reasoning that exploits the fact that only a subset of explanations is correct for a given context.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-24T01:35:10Z) - Generative Context Pair Selection for Multi-hop Question Answering [60.74354009152721]
We propose a generative context selection model for multi-hop question answering.
Our proposed generative passage selection model has a better performance (4.9% higher than baseline) on adversarial held-out set.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-04-18T07:00:48Z) - Contrastive Explanations for Model Interpretability [77.92370750072831]
We propose a methodology to produce contrastive explanations for classification models.
Our method is based on projecting model representation to a latent space.
Our findings shed light on the ability of label-contrastive explanations to provide a more accurate and finer-grained interpretability of a model's decision.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-03-02T00:36:45Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.