Few-shot abstractive summarization has become a challenging task in natural language generation. To support it, we developed a novel soft prompts architecture coupled with a prompt pre-training plus prompt fine-tuning paradigm, which is effective and tunes only extremely light parameters. To meet the structure of the generation models, the soft prompts comprise continuous input embeddings across an encoder and a decoder. Importantly, a new inner-prompt placed in the text is introduced to capture document-level information. The aim is to devote attention to understanding the document that better prompts the model to generate document-related content. In the training process, the prompt pre-training with self-supervised pseudo-data firstly teaches the model basic summarizing capability. Then, with few-shot examples, only the designed lightweight soft prompts are fine-tuned. Experimental results on the CNN/DailyMail and XSum datasets show that our method, with only 0.1% of the parameters, outperforms full-model tuning where all model parameters are tuned. It also surpasses Prompt Tuning by a large margin and delivers competitive results against Prefix-Tuning with 3% of the parameters.

In this paper, we introduce the Eval4NLP-2021 shared task on explainable quality estimation. Given a source-translation pair, this shared task requires not only to provide a sentence-level score indicating the overall quality of the translation, but also to explain this score by identifying the words that negatively impact translation quality. We present the data, annotation guidelines and evaluation setup of the shared task, describe the six participating systems, and analyze the results. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first shared task on explainable NLP evaluation metrics. Datasets and results are available at https://github.com/eval4nlp/SharedTask2021.

Parallel cross-lingual summarization data is scarce, requiring models to better use the limited available cross-lingual resources. Existing methods to do so often adopt sequence-to-sequence networks with multi-task frameworks. Such approaches apply multiple decoders, each of which is utilized for a specific task. However, these independent decoders share no parameters, hence fail to capture the relationships between the discrete phrases of summaries in different languages, breaking the connections in order to transfer the knowledge of the high-resource languages to low-resource languages. To bridge these connections, we propose a novel Multi-Task framework for Cross-Lingual Abstractive Summarization (MCLAS) in a low-resource setting. Employing one unified decoder to generate the sequential concatenation of monolingual and cross-lingual summaries, MCLAS makes the monolingual summarization task a prerequisite of the CLS task. In this way, the shared decoder learns interactions involving alignments and summary patterns across languages, which encourages attaining knowledge transfer. Experiments on two CLS datasets demonstrate that our model significantly outperforms three baseline models in both low-resource and full-dataset scenarios. Moreover, in-depth analysis on the generated summaries and attention heads verifies that interactions are learned well using MCLAS, which benefits the CLS task under limited parallel resources.

Health professional regulators aim to protect the health and well-being of patients and the public by setting standards for scrutinising and overseeing the training and conduct of health and care professionals. A major task of such regulators is the investigation of complaints against practitioners. However, processing a complaint often lasts several months and is particularly costly. Hence, we worked with international regulators from different countries (the UK, US and Australia), to develop the first decision support tool that aims to help such regulators process complaints more efficiently. Our system uses state-of-the-art machine learning and natural language processing techniques to process complaints and predict their risk level. Our tool also provides additional useful information including explanations, to help the regulatory staff interpret the prediction results, and similar past cases as well as non-compliance to regulations, to support the decision making.

Dependency parse trees are helpful for discovering the opinion words in aspect-based sentiment analysis (ABSA) (CITATION). However, the trees obtained from off-the-shelf dependency parsers are static, and could be sub-optimal in ABSA. This is because the syntactic trees are not designed for capturing the interactions between opinion words and aspect words. In this work, we aim to shorten the distance between aspects and corresponding opinion words by learning an aspect-centric tree structure. The aspect and opinion words are expected to be closer along such tree structure compared to the standard dependency parse tree. The learning process allows the tree structure to adaptively correlate the aspect and opinion words, enabling us to better identify the polarity in the ABSA task. We conduct experiments on five aspect-based sentiment datasets, and the proposed model significantly outperforms recent strong baselines. Furthermore, our thorough analysis demonstrates the average distance between aspect and opinion words are shortened by at least 19% on the standard SemEval Restaurant14 (CITATION) dataset.

We study unsupervised multi-document summarization evaluation metrics, which require neither human-written reference summaries nor human annotations (e.g. preferences, ratings, etc.). We propose SUPERT, which rates the quality of a summary by measuring its semantic similarity with a pseudo reference summary, i.e. selected salient sentences from the source documents, using contextualized embeddings and soft token alignment techniques. Compared to the state-of-the-art unsupervised evaluation metrics, SUPERT correlates better with human ratings by 18- 39%. Furthermore, we use SUPERT as rewards to guide a neural-based reinforcement learning summarizer, yielding favorable performance compared to the state-of-the-art unsupervised summarizers. All source code is available at https://github.com/yg211/acl20-ref-free-eval.

Evaluation of cross-lingual encoders is usually performed either via zero-shot cross-lingual transfer in supervised downstream tasks or via unsupervised cross-lingual textual similarity. In this paper, we concern ourselves with reference-free machine translation (MT) evaluation where we directly compare source texts to (sometimes low-quality) system translations, which represents a natural adversarial setup for multilingual encoders. Reference-free evaluation holds the promise of web-scale comparison of MT systems. We systematically investigate a range of metrics based on state-of-the-art cross-lingual semantic representations obtained with pretrained M-BERT and LASER. We find that they perform poorly as semantic encoders for reference-free MT evaluation and identify their two key limitations, namely, (a) a semantic mismatch between representations of mutual translations and, more prominently, (b) the inability to punish “translationese”, i.e., low-quality literal translations. We propose two partial remedies: (1) post-hoc re-alignment of the vector spaces and (2) coupling of semantic-similarity based metrics with target-side language modeling. In segment-level MT evaluation, our best metric surpasses reference-based BLEU by 5.7 correlation points.

For many real-world classification problems, e.g., sentiment classification, most existing machine learning methods are biased towards the majority class when the Imbalance Ratio (IR) is high. To address this problem, we propose a set convolution (SetConv) operation and an episodic training strategy to extract a single representative for each class, so that classifiers can later be trained on a balanced class distribution. We prove that our proposed algorithm is permutation-invariant despite the order of inputs, and experiments on multiple large-scale benchmark text datasets show the superiority of our proposed framework when compared to other SOTA methods.

For many NLP applications, such as question answering and summarization, the goal is to select the best solution from a large space of candidates to meet a particular user’s needs. To address the lack of user or task-specific training data, we propose an interactive text ranking approach that actively selects pairs of candidates, from which the user selects the best. Unlike previous strategies, which attempt to learn a ranking across the whole candidate space, our method uses Bayesian optimization to focus the user’s labeling effort on high quality candidates and integrate prior knowledge to cope better with small data scenarios. We apply our method to community question answering (cQA) and extractive multidocument summarization, finding that it significantly outperforms existing interactive approaches. We also show that the ranking function learned by our method is an effective reward function for reinforcement learning, which improves the state of the art for interactive summarization.

A robust evaluation metric has a profound impact on the development of text generation systems. A desirable metric compares system output against references based on their semantics rather than surface forms. In this paper we investigate strategies to encode system and reference texts to devise a metric that shows a high correlation with human judgment of text quality. We validate our new metric, namely MoverScore, on a number of text generation tasks including summarization, machine translation, image captioning, and data-to-text generation, where the outputs are produced by a variety of neural and non-neural systems. Our findings suggest that metrics combining contextualized representations with a distance measure perform the best. Such metrics also demonstrate strong generalization capability across tasks. For ease-of-use we make our metrics available as web service.

A quality abstractive summary should not only copy salient source texts as summaries but should also tend to generate new conceptual words to express concrete details. Inspired by the popular pointer generator sequence-to-sequence model, this paper presents a concept pointer network for improving these aspects of abstractive summarization. The network leverages knowledge-based, context-aware conceptualizations to derive an extended set of candidate concepts. The model then points to the most appropriate choice using both the concept set and original source text. This joint approach generates abstractive summaries with higher-level semantic concepts. The training model is also optimized in a way that adapts to different data, which is based on a novel method of distant-supervised learning guided by reference summaries and testing set. Overall, the proposed approach provides statistically significant improvements over several state-of-the-art models on both the DUC-2004 and Gigaword datasets. A human evaluation of the model’s abstractive abilities also supports the quality of the summaries produced within this framework.

Reinforcement Learning (RL)based document summarisation systems yield state-of-the-art performance in terms of ROUGE scores, because they directly use ROUGE as the rewards during training. However, summaries with high ROUGE scores often receive low human judgement. To find a better reward function that can guide RL to generate human-appealing summaries, we learn a reward function from human ratings on 2,500 summaries. Our reward function only takes the document and system summary as input. Hence, once trained, it can be used to train RL based summarisation systems without using any reference summaries. We show that our learned rewards have significantly higher correlation with human ratings than previous approaches. Human evaluation experiments show that, compared to the state-of-the-art supervised-learning systems and ROUGE-as-rewards RL summarisation systems, the RL systems using our learned rewards during training generate summaries with higher human ratings. The learned reward function and our source code are available at https://github.com/yg211/summary-reward-no-reference.

Conducting a manual evaluation is considered an essential part of summary evaluation methodology. Traditionally, the Pyramid protocol, which exhaustively compares system summaries to references, has been perceived as very reliable, providing objective scores. Yet, due to the high cost of the Pyramid method and the required expertise, researchers resorted to cheaper and less thorough manual evaluation methods, such as Responsiveness and pairwise comparison, attainable via crowdsourcing. We revisit the Pyramid approach, proposing a lightweight sampling-based version that is crowdsourcable. We analyze the performance of our method in comparison to original expert-based Pyramid evaluations, showing higher correlation relative to the common Responsiveness method. We release our crowdsourced Summary-Content-Units, along with all crowdsourcing scripts, for future evaluations.

Peer review is a core element of the scientific process, particularly in conference-centered fields such as ML and NLP. However, only few studies have evaluated its properties empirically. Aiming to fill this gap, we present a corpus that contains over 4k reviews and 1.2k author responses from ACL-2018. We quantitatively and qualitatively assess the corpus. This includes a pilot study on paper weaknesses given by reviewers and on quality of author responses. We then focus on the role of the rebuttal phase, and propose a novel task to predict after-rebuttal (i.e., final) scores from initial reviews and author responses. Although author responses do have a marginal (and statistically significant) influence on the final scores, especially for borderline papers, our results suggest that a reviewer’s final score is largely determined by her initial score and the distance to the other reviewers’ initial scores. In this context, we discuss the conformity bias inherent to peer reviewing, a bias that has largely been overlooked in previous research. We hope our analyses will help better assess the usefulness of the rebuttal phase in NLP conferences.

We propose a method to perform automatic document summarisation without using reference summaries. Instead, our method interactively learns from users’ preferences. The merit of preference-based interactive summarisation is that preferences are easier for users to provide than reference summaries. Existing preference-based interactive learning methods suffer from high sample complexity, i.e. they need to interact with the oracle for many rounds in order to converge. In this work, we propose a new objective function, which enables us to leverage active learning, preference learning and reinforcement learning techniques in order to reduce the sample complexity. Both simulation and real-user experiments suggest that our method significantly advances the state of the art. Our source code is freely available at https://github.com/UKPLab/emnlp2018-april.

Distributed word representation plays a pivotal role in various natural language processing tasks. In spite of its success, most existing methods only consider contextual information, which is suboptimal when used in various tasks due to a lack of task-specific features. The rational word embeddings should have the ability to capture both the semantic features and task-specific features of words. In this paper, we propose a task-oriented word embedding method and apply it to the text classification task. With the function-aware component, our method regularizes the distribution of words to enable the embedding space to have a clear classification boundary. We evaluate our method using five text classification datasets. The experiment results show that our method significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art methods.

We study the helpful product reviews identification problem in this paper. We observe that the evidence-conclusion discourse relations, also known as arguments, often appear in product reviews, and we hypothesise that some argument-based features, e.g. the percentage of argumentative sentences, the evidences-conclusions ratios, are good indicators of helpful reviews. To validate this hypothesis, we manually annotate arguments in 110 hotel reviews, and investigate the effectiveness of several combinations of argument-based features. Experiments suggest that, when being used together with the argument-based features, the state-of-the-art baseline features can enjoy a performance boost (in terms of F1) of 11.01% in average.