State-of-the-art generalisation research in NLP: A taxonomy and review

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2210.03050v4
• Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 13:11:20 GMT
• Title: State-of-the-art generalisation research in NLP: A taxonomy and review
• Authors: Dieuwke Hupkes, Mario Giulianelli, Verna Dankers, Mikel Artetxe, Yanai Elazar, Tiago Pimentel, Christos Christodoulopoulos, Karim Lasri, Naomi Saphra, Arabella Sinclair, Dennis Ulmer, Florian Schottmann, Khuyagbaatar Batsuren, Kaiser Sun, Koustuv Sinha, Leila Khalatbari, Maria Ryskina, Rita Frieske, Ryan Cotterell, Zhijing Jin
• Abstract summary: We present a taxonomy for characterising and understanding generalisation research in NLP. Our taxonomy is based on an extensive literature review of generalisation research. We use our taxonomy to classify over 400 papers that test generalisation.
• Score: 87.1541712509283
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The ability to generalise well is one of the primary desiderata of natural language processing (NLP). Yet, what 'good generalisation' entails and how it should be evaluated is not well understood, nor are there any evaluation standards for generalisation. In this paper, we lay the groundwork to address both of these issues. We present a taxonomy for characterising and understanding generalisation research in NLP. Our taxonomy is based on an extensive literature review of generalisation research, and contains five axes along which studies can differ: their main motivation, the type of generalisation they investigate, the type of data shift they consider, the source of this data shift, and the locus of the shift within the modelling pipeline. We use our taxonomy to classify over 400 papers that test generalisation, for a total of more than 600 individual experiments. Considering the results of this review, we present an in-depth analysis that maps out the current state of generalisation research in NLP, and we make recommendations for which areas might deserve attention in the future. Along with this paper, we release a webpage where the results of our review can be dynamically explored, and which we intend to update as new NLP generalisation studies are published. With this work, we aim to take steps towards making state-of-the-art generalisation testing the new status quo in NLP.

Related papers

• Are Large Language Models Good Classifiers? A Study on Edit Intent Classification in Scientific Document Revisions [62.12545440385489]
  Large language models (LLMs) have brought substantial advancements in text generation, but their potential for enhancing classification tasks remains underexplored. We propose a framework for thoroughly investigating fine-tuning LLMs for classification, including both generation- and encoding-based approaches. We instantiate this framework in edit intent classification (EIC), a challenging and underexplored classification task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T20:48:28Z)
• A Comprehensive Survey of Bias in LLMs: Current Landscape and Future Directions [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized various applications in natural language processing (NLP) by providing unprecedented text generation, translation, and comprehension capabilities. Their widespread deployment has brought to light significant concerns regarding biases embedded within these models. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of biases in LLMs, aiming to provide an extensive review of the types, sources, impacts, and mitigation strategies related to these biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-24T19:50:38Z)
• A Literature Review of Literature Reviews in Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence [58.6354685593418]
  This paper proposes several article-level, field-normalized, and large language model-empowered bibliometric indicators to evaluate reviews. The newly emerging AI-generated literature reviews are also appraised. This work offers insights into the current challenges of literature reviews and envisions future directions for their development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T11:28:50Z)
• This Prompt is Measuring <MASK>: Evaluating Bias Evaluation in Language Models [12.214260053244871]
  We analyse the body of work that uses prompts and templates to assess bias in language models. We draw on a measurement modelling framework to create a taxonomy of attributes that capture what a bias test aims to measure. Our analysis illuminates the scope of possible bias types the field is able to measure, and reveals types that are as yet under-researched.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T06:28:48Z)
• Square One Bias in NLP: Towards a Multi-Dimensional Exploration of the Research Manifold [88.83876819883653]
  We show through a manual classification of recent NLP research papers that this is indeed the case. We observe that NLP research often goes beyond the square one setup, focusing not only on accuracy, but also on fairness or interpretability, but typically only along a single dimension.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-20T13:04:23Z)
• Towards Out-Of-Distribution Generalization: A Survey [46.329995334444156]
  Out-of-Distribution generalization is an emerging topic of machine learning research. This paper represents the first comprehensive, systematic review of OOD generalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-31T05:28:42Z)
• Domain Generalization: A Survey [146.68420112164577]
  Domain generalization (DG) aims to achieve OOD generalization by only using source domain data for model learning. For the first time, a comprehensive literature review is provided to summarize the ten-year development in DG.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-03T16:12:22Z)
• Automatic generation of reviews of scientific papers [1.1999555634662633]
  We present a method for the automatic generation of a review paper corresponding to a user-defined query. The first part identifies key papers in the area by their bibliometric parameters, such as a graph of co-citations. The second stage uses a BERT based architecture that we train on existing reviews for extractive summarization of these key papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-08T17:47:07Z)
• A Survey on Text Classification: From Shallow to Deep Learning [83.47804123133719]
  The last decade has seen a surge of research in this area due to the unprecedented success of deep learning. This paper fills the gap by reviewing the state-of-the-art approaches from 1961 to 2021. We create a taxonomy for text classification according to the text involved and the models used for feature extraction and classification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-02T00:09:03Z)

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.