EXCGEC: A Benchmark of Edit-wise Explainable Chinese Grammatical Error Correction

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.00924v1
• Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 03:06:41 GMT
• Title: EXCGEC: A Benchmark of Edit-wise Explainable Chinese Grammatical Error Correction
• Authors: Jingheng Ye, Shang Qin, Yinghui Li, Xuxin Cheng, Libo Qin, Hai-Tao Zheng, Peng Xing, Zishan Xu, Guo Cheng, Zhao Wei,
• Abstract summary: This paper introduces the task of EXplainable GEC (EXGEC), which focuses on the integral role of both correction and explanation tasks. We propose EXCGEC, a tailored benchmark for Chinese EXGEC consisting of 8,216 explanation-augmented samples.
• Score: 21.869368698234247
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Existing studies explore the explainability of Grammatical Error Correction (GEC) in a limited scenario, where they ignore the interaction between corrections and explanations. To bridge the gap, this paper introduces the task of EXplainable GEC (EXGEC), which focuses on the integral role of both correction and explanation tasks. To facilitate the task, we propose EXCGEC, a tailored benchmark for Chinese EXGEC consisting of 8,216 explanation-augmented samples featuring the design of hybrid edit-wise explanations. We benchmark several series of LLMs in multiple settings, covering post-explaining and pre-explaining. To promote the development of the task, we introduce a comprehensive suite of automatic metrics and conduct human evaluation experiments to demonstrate the human consistency of the automatic metrics for free-text explanations. All the codes and data will be released after the review.

Related papers

• Learning Task Representations from In-Context Learning [73.72066284711462]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable proficiency in in-context learning. We introduce an automated formulation for encoding task information in ICL prompts as a function of attention heads. We show that our method's effectiveness stems from aligning the distribution of the last hidden state with that of an optimally performing in-context-learned model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-08T00:16:44Z)
• Improving Explainability of Sentence-level Metrics via Edit-level Attribution for Grammatical Error Correction [11.512856112792093]
  We propose attributing sentence-level scores to individual edits, providing insight into how specific corrections contribute to the overall performance. Experiments with existing sentence-level metrics demonstrate high consistency across different edit granularities and show approximately 70% alignment with human evaluations. In addition, we analyze biases in the metrics based on the attribution results, revealing trends such as the tendency to ignore orthographic edits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-17T17:31:17Z)
• Benchmarking Large Language Models for Conversational Question Answering in Multi-instructional Documents [61.41316121093604]
  We present InsCoQA, a novel benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) in the context of conversational question answering (CQA) Sourced from extensive, encyclopedia-style instructional content, InsCoQA assesses models on their ability to retrieve, interpret, and accurately summarize procedural guidance from multiple documents. We also propose InsEval, an LLM-assisted evaluator that measures the integrity and accuracy of generated responses and procedural instructions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-01T09:10:00Z)
• Retrieved In-Context Principles from Previous Mistakes [55.109234526031884]
  In-context learning (ICL) has been instrumental in adapting Large Language Models (LLMs) to downstream tasks using correct input-output examples. Recent advances have attempted to improve model performance through principles derived from mistakes. We propose Retrieved In-Context Principles (RICP), a novel teacher-student framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T07:32:26Z)
• Narrative Action Evaluation with Prompt-Guided Multimodal Interaction [60.281405999483]
  Narrative action evaluation (NAE) aims to generate professional commentary that evaluates the execution of an action. NAE is a more challenging task because it requires both narrative flexibility and evaluation rigor. We propose a prompt-guided multimodal interaction framework to facilitate the interaction between different modalities of information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-22T17:55:07Z)
• Evaluating Generative Language Models in Information Extraction as Subjective Question Correction [49.729908337372436]
  We propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. Inspired by the principles in subjective question correction, we propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. Results on three information extraction tasks show that SQC-Score is more preferred by human annotators than the baseline metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T15:36:53Z)
• Guideline Learning for In-context Information Extraction [29.062173997909028]
  In-context Information Extraction (IE) has recently garnered attention in the research community. We highlight a key reason for this shortfall: underspecified task description. We propose a Guideline Learning framework for In-context IE which reflectively learns and follows guidelines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-08T08:25:16Z)
• CLEME: Debiasing Multi-reference Evaluation for Grammatical Error Correction [32.44051877804761]
  Chunk-LEvel Multi-reference Evaluation (CLEME) is designed to evaluate Grammatical Error Correction (GEC) systems in the multi-reference evaluation setting. We conduct experiments on six English reference sets based on the CoNLL-2014 shared task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-18T08:57:17Z)
• Unsupervised Reference-Free Summary Quality Evaluation via Contrastive Learning [66.30909748400023]
  We propose to evaluate the summary qualities without reference summaries by unsupervised contrastive learning. Specifically, we design a new metric which covers both linguistic qualities and semantic informativeness based on BERT. Experiments on Newsroom and CNN/Daily Mail demonstrate that our new evaluation method outperforms other metrics even without reference summaries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-05T05:04:14Z)

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.