Large, Small or Both: A Novel Data Augmentation Framework Based on Language Models for Debiasing Opinion Summarization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.07693v2
• Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 19:20:05 GMT
• Title: Large, Small or Both: A Novel Data Augmentation Framework Based on Language Models for Debiasing Opinion Summarization
• Authors: Yanyue Zhang, Pengfei Li, Yilong Lai, Deyu Zhou, Yulan He,
• Abstract summary: Current opinion summarization approaches are reluctant to generate negative summaries given the input of negative texts. We propose a novel data augmentation framework based on both large and small language models. Our framework can effectively alleviate emotional bias same as using only large models, but more economically.
• Score: 32.814792889137145
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: As more than 70$\%$ of reviews in the existing opinion summary data set are positive, current opinion summarization approaches are reluctant to generate negative summaries given the input of negative texts. To address such sentiment bias, a direct approach without the over-reliance on a specific framework is to generate additional data based on large language models to balance the emotional distribution of the dataset. However, data augmentation based on large language models faces two disadvantages: 1) the potential issues or toxicity in the augmented data; 2) the expensive costs. Therefore, in this paper, we propose a novel data augmentation framework based on both large and small language models for debiasing opinion summarization. In specific, a small size of synthesized negative reviews is obtained by rewriting the positive text via a large language model. Then, a disentangle reconstruction model is trained based on the generated data. After training, a large amount of synthetic data can be obtained by decoding the new representation obtained from the combination of different sample representations and filtering based on confusion degree and sentiment classification. Experiments have proved that our framework can effectively alleviate emotional bias same as using only large models, but more economically.

Related papers

• Generating Enhanced Negatives for Training Language-Based Object Detectors [86.1914216335631]
  We propose to leverage the vast knowledge built into modern generative models to automatically build negatives that are more relevant to the original data. Specifically, we use large-language-models to generate negative text descriptions, and text-to-image diffusion models to also generate corresponding negative images. Our experimental analysis confirms the relevance of the generated negative data, and its use in language-based detectors improves performance on two complex benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-29T23:04:00Z)
• Debiasing Vision-Language Models via Biased Prompts [79.04467131711775]
  We propose a general approach for debiasing vision-language foundation models by projecting out biased directions in the text embedding. We show that debiasing only the text embedding with a calibrated projection matrix suffices to yield robust classifiers and fair generative models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-31T20:09:33Z)
• mFACE: Multilingual Summarization with Factual Consistency Evaluation [79.60172087719356]
  Abstractive summarization has enjoyed renewed interest in recent years, thanks to pre-trained language models and the availability of large-scale datasets. Despite promising results, current models still suffer from generating factually inconsistent summaries. We leverage factual consistency evaluation models to improve multilingual summarization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-20T19:52:41Z)
• CLIFF: Contrastive Learning for Improving Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarization [6.017006996402699]
  We study generating abstractive summaries that are faithful and factually consistent with the given articles. A novel contrastive learning formulation is presented, which leverages both reference summaries, as positive training data, and automatically generated erroneous summaries, as negative training data, to train summarization systems that are better at distinguishing between them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-19T20:05:21Z)
• Improving Robustness by Augmenting Training Sentences with Predicate-Argument Structures [62.562760228942054]
  Existing approaches to improve robustness against dataset biases mostly focus on changing the training objective. We propose to augment the input sentences in the training data with their corresponding predicate-argument structures. We show that without targeting a specific bias, our sentence augmentation improves the robustness of transformer models against multiple biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-23T16:22:05Z)
• Comparison of Interactive Knowledge Base Spelling Correction Models for Low-Resource Languages [81.90356787324481]
  Spelling normalization for low resource languages is a challenging task because the patterns are hard to predict. This work shows a comparison of a neural model and character language models with varying amounts on target language data. Our usage scenario is interactive correction with nearly zero amounts of training examples, improving models as more data is collected.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-20T17:31:07Z)
• Few-Shot Learning for Opinion Summarization [117.70510762845338]
  Opinion summarization is the automatic creation of text reflecting subjective information expressed in multiple documents. In this work, we show that even a handful of summaries is sufficient to bootstrap generation of the summary text. Our approach substantially outperforms previous extractive and abstractive methods in automatic and human evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-30T15:37:38Z)

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.