The Self-Contained Negation Test Set

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.11469v1
• Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 09:38:15 GMT
• Title: The Self-Contained Negation Test Set
• Authors: David Kletz, Pascal Amsili, Marie Candito,
• Abstract summary: We build on Gubelmann and Handschuh (2022), which studies the modification of PLMs' predictions as a function of the polarity of inputs, in English. This test uses self-contained'' inputs ending with a masked position. We propose an improved version, the Self-Contained Neg Test, which is more controlled, more systematic, and entirely based on examples forming minimal pairs.
• Score: 1.8749305679160366
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Several methodologies have recently been proposed to evaluate the ability of Pretrained Language Models (PLMs) to interpret negation. In this article, we build on Gubelmann and Handschuh (2022), which studies the modification of PLMs' predictions as a function of the polarity of inputs, in English. Crucially, this test uses ``self-contained'' inputs ending with a masked position: depending on the polarity of a verb in the input, a particular token is either semantically ruled out or allowed at the masked position. By replicating Gubelmann and Handschuh (2022) experiments, we have uncovered flaws that weaken the conclusions that can be drawn from this test. We thus propose an improved version, the Self-Contained Neg Test, which is more controlled, more systematic, and entirely based on examples forming minimal pairs varying only in the presence or absence of verbal negation in English. When applying our test to the roberta and bert base and large models, we show that only roberta-large shows trends that match the expectations, while bert-base is mostly insensitive to negation. For all the tested models though, in a significant number of test instances the top-1 prediction remains the token that is semantically forbidden by the context, which shows how much room for improvement remains for a proper treatment of the negation phenomenon.

Related papers

• Probing structural constraints of negation in Pretrained Language Models [1.8749305679160366]
  We use probes to identify which contextual representations best encode the presence of negation in a sentence. We find that contextual representations of tokens inside the negation scope do allow for (i) a better prediction of the presence of not compared to those outside the scope. Yet, further control experiments reveal that the presence of other lexical items is also better captured when using the contextual representation of a token within the same syntactic clause.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-06T09:54:49Z)
• Revisiting subword tokenization: A case study on affixal negation in large language models [57.75279238091522]
  We measure the impact of affixal negation on modern English large language models (LLMs) We conduct experiments using LLMs with different subword tokenization methods. We show that models can, on the whole, reliably recognize the meaning of affixal negation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-03T03:14:27Z)
• Language models are not naysayers: An analysis of language models on negation benchmarks [58.32362243122714]
  We evaluate the ability of current-generation auto-regressive language models to handle negation. We show that LLMs have several limitations including insensitivity to the presence of negation, an inability to capture the lexical semantics of negation, and a failure to reason under negation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-14T01:16:37Z)
• Language Model Pre-training on True Negatives [109.73819321246062]
  Discriminative pre-trained language models (PLMs) learn to predict original texts from intentionally corrupted ones. Existing PLMs simply treat all corrupted texts as equal negative without any examination. We design enhanced pre-training methods to counteract false negative predictions and encourage pre-training language models on true negatives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-01T12:24:19Z)
• CONDAQA: A Contrastive Reading Comprehension Dataset for Reasoning about Negation [21.56001677478673]
  We present the first English reading comprehension dataset which requires reasoning about the implications of negated statements in paragraphs. CONDAQA features 14,182 question-answer pairs with over 200 unique negation cues. The best performing model on CONDAQA (UnifiedQA-v2-3b) achieves only 42% on our consistency metric, well below human performance which is 81%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-01T06:10:26Z)
• Not another Negation Benchmark: The NaN-NLI Test Suite for Sub-clausal Negation [59.307534363825816]
  Negation is poorly captured by current language models, although the extent of this problem is not widely understood. We introduce a natural language inference (NLI) test suite to enable probing the capabilities of NLP methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-06T23:39:01Z)
• Improving negation detection with negation-focused pre-training [58.32362243122714]
  Negation is a common linguistic feature that is crucial in many language understanding tasks. Recent work has shown that state-of-the-art NLP models underperform on samples containing negation. We propose a new negation-focused pre-training strategy, involving targeted data augmentation and negation masking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-09T02:41:11Z)
• Double Perturbation: On the Robustness of Robustness and Counterfactual Bias Evaluation [109.06060143938052]
  We propose a "double perturbation" framework to uncover model weaknesses beyond the test dataset. We apply this framework to study two perturbation-based approaches that are used to analyze models' robustness and counterfactual bias in English.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-12T06:57:36Z)

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.