Natural language processing (NLP) technology has rapidly improved automated grammatical error correction (GEC) tasks, and the GEC community has begun to explore document-level revision. However, there are two major obstacles to going beyond automated sentence-level GEC to NLP-based document-level revision support: (1) there are few public corpora with document-level revisions annotated by professional editors, and (2) it is infeasible to obtain all possible references and evaluate revision quality using such references because there are infinite revision possibilities. To address these challenges, this paper proposes a new document revision corpus, Text Revision of ACL papers (TETRA), in which multiple professional editors have revised academic papers sampled from the ACL anthology. This corpus enables us to focus on document-level and paragraph-level edits, such as edits related to coherence and consistency. Additionally, as a case study using the TETRA corpus, we investigate reference-less and interpretable methods for meta-evaluation to detect quality improvements according to document revisions. We show the uniqueness of TETRA compared with existing document revision corpora and demonstrate that a fine-tuned pre-trained language model can discriminate the quality of documents after revision even when the difference is subtle.

Explicit multi-step reasoning, such as chain-of-thought, is widely adopted in the community to explore the better performance of language models (LMs). We report on the systematic strategy that LMs use in this process.Our controlled experiments reveal that LMs rely more heavily on heuristics, such as lexical overlap, in the earlier stages of reasoning when more steps are required to reach an answer. Conversely, their reliance on heuristics decreases as LMs progress closer to the final answer. This suggests that LMs track only a limited number of future steps and dynamically combine heuristic strategies with rational ones in solving tasks involving multi-step reasoning.

Text generation with beam search has proven successful in a wide range of applications. We point out that, though largely overlooked in the literature, the commonly-used implementation of beam decoding (e.g., Hugging Face Transformers and fairseq) uses a first come, first served heuristic: it keeps a set of already completed sequences over time steps and stops when the size of this set reaches the beam size. Based on this finding, we introduce a patience factor, a simple modification to this beam decoding implementation, that generalizes the stopping criterion and provides flexibility to the depth of search. Empirical results demonstrate that adjusting this patience factor improves decoding performance of strong pretrained models on news text summarization and machine translation over diverse language pairs, with a negligible inference slowdown. Our approach only modifies one line of code and can be thus readily incorporated in any implementation. Further, we find that different versions of beam decoding result in large performance differences in summarization, demonstrating the need for clarity in specifying the beam search implementation in research work. Our code will be available upon publication.

The evolution of large language models has enabled fluent dialogue, increasing interest in the coexistence of humans and avatars. An essential aspect of achieving this coexistence involves developing sophisticated dialogue systems that can influence user behavior. In this background, we propose an effective multimodal dialogue system designed to promote consensus building with humans. Our system employs a slot-filling strategy to guide discussions and attempts to influence users with suggestions through emotional expression and intent conveyance via its avatar. These innovations have resulted in our system achieving the highest performance in a competition evaluating consensus building between humans and dialogue systems. We hope that our research will promote further discussion on the development of dialogue systems that enhance consensus building in human collaboration.

We introduce a Japanese Morphology dataset, J-UniMorph, developed based on the UniMorph feature schema. This dataset addresses the unique and rich verb forms characteristic of the language’s agglutinative nature. J-UniMorph distinguishes itself from the existing Japanese subset of UniMorph, which is automatically extracted from Wiktionary. On average, the Wiktionary Edition features around 12 inflected forms for each word and is primarily dominated by denominal verbs (i.e., [noun] + suru (do-PRS)). Morphologically, this inflection pattern is same as the verb suru (do). In contrast, J-UniMorph explores a much broader and more frequently used range of verb forms, offering 118 inflected forms for each word on average. It includes honorifics, a range of politeness levels, and other linguistic nuances, emphasizing the distinctive characteristics of the Japanese language. This paper presents detailed statistics and characteristics of J-UniMorph, comparing it with the Wiktionary Edition. We will release J-UniMorph and its interactive visualizer publicly available, aiming to support cross-linguistic research and various applications.

We present ELQA, a corpus of questions and answers in and about the English language. Collected from two online forums, the >70k questions (from English learners and others) cover wide-ranging topics including grammar, meaning, fluency, and etymology. The answers include descriptions of general properties of English vocabulary and grammar as well as explanations about specific (correct and incorrect) usage examples. Unlike most NLP datasets, this corpus is metalinguistic—it consists of language about language. As such, it can facilitate investigations of the metalinguistic capabilities of NLU models, as well as educational applications in the language learning domain. To study this, we define a free-form question answering task on our dataset and conduct evaluations on multiple LLMs (Large Language Models) to analyze their capacity to generate metalinguistic answers.

Commonsense capabilities of pre-trained language models dramatically improve with scale, leading many to believe that scale is the only winning recipe. But is it? Here, we investigate an alternative that a priori seems impossible: can smaller language models (e.g., GPT-2) win over models that are orders of magnitude larger and better (e.g., GPT-3), if powered with novel commonsense distillation algorithms?The key intellectual challenge is to design a learning algorithm that achieve a competitive level of commonsense acquisition, without relying on the benefits of scale. In particular, we study generative models of commonsense knowledge, focusing on the task of generating generics, statements of commonsense facts about everyday concepts, e.g., birds can fly. We introduce I2D2, a novel commonsense distillation framework that loosely follows the Symbolic Knowledge Distillation of West et al. but breaks the dependence on the extreme-scale teacher model with two innovations: (1) the novel adaptation of NeuroLogic Decoding to enhance the generation quality of the weak, off-the-shelf language models, and (2) self-imitation learning to iteratively learn from the model’s own enhanced commonsense acquisition capabilities. Empirical results suggest that scale is not the only way, as novel algorithms can be a promising alternative. Moreover, our study leads to a new corpus of generics, Gen-A-tomic, that is the largest and highest quality available to date.

Compositionality is a pivotal property of symbolic reasoning. However, how well recent neural models capture compositionality remains underexplored in the symbolic reasoning tasks. This study empirically addresses this question by systematically examining recently published pre-trained seq2seq models with a carefully controlled dataset of multi-hop arithmetic symbolic reasoning. We introduce a skill tree on compositionality in arithmetic symbolic reasoning that defines the hierarchical levels of complexity along with three compositionality dimensions: systematicity, productivity, and substitutivity. Our experiments revealed that among the three types of composition, the models struggled most with systematicity, performing poorly even with relatively simple compositions. That difficulty was not resolved even after training the models with intermediate reasoning steps.

Neural reasoning accuracy improves when generating intermediate reasoning steps. However, the source of this improvement is yet unclear. Here, we investigate and factorize the benefit of generating intermediate steps for symbolic reasoning. Specifically, we decompose the reasoning strategy w.r.t. step granularity and chaining strategy. With a purely symbolic numerical reasoning dataset (e.g., A=1, B=3, C=A+3, C?), we found that the choice of reasoning strategies significantly affects the performance, with the gap becoming even larger as the extrapolation length becomes longer. Surprisingly, we also found that certain configurations lead to nearly perfect performance, even in the case of length extrapolation. Our results indicate the importance of further exploring effective strategies for neural reasoning models.

Factual probing is a method that uses prompts to test if a language model “knows” certain world knowledge facts. A problem in factual probing is that small changes to the prompt can lead to large changes in model output. Previous work aimed to alleviate this problem by optimizing prompts via text mining or fine-tuning. However, such approaches are relation-specific and do not generalize to unseen relation types. Here, we propose to use test-time augmentation (TTA) as a relation-agnostic method for reducing sensitivity to prompt variations by automatically augmenting and ensembling prompts at test time. Experiments show improved model calibration, i.e., with TTA, model confidence better reflects prediction accuracy. Improvements in prediction accuracy are observed for some models, but for other models, TTA leads to degradation. Error analysis identifies the difficulty of producing high-quality prompt variations as the main challenge for TTA.

Many language generation models are now available for a wide range of generation tasks, including machine translation and summarization. Combining such diverse models may lead to further progress, but ensembling generation models is challenging during inference: conventional ensembling methods (e.g., shallow fusion) require that the models share vocabulary/tokenization schemes. We introduce Twist decoding, a simple and general text generation algorithm that benefits from diverse models at inference time. Our method does not assume the vocabulary, tokenization or even generation order is shared. Our extensive evaluations on machine translation and scientific paper summarization demonstrate that Twist decoding substantially outperforms each model decoded in isolation over various scenarios, including cases where domain-specific and general-purpose models are both available. Twist decoding also consistently outperforms the popular reranking heuristic where output candidates from one model are rescored by another. We hope that our work will encourage researchers and practitioners to examine generation models collectively, not just independently, and to seek out models with complementary strengths to the currently available models.

We establish THumB, a rubric-based human evaluation protocol for image captioning models. Our scoring rubrics and their definitions are carefully developed based on machine- and human-generated captions on the MSCOCO dataset. Each caption is evaluated along two main dimensions in a tradeoff (precision and recall) as well as other aspects that measure the text quality (fluency, conciseness, and inclusive language). Our evaluations demonstrate several critical problems of the current evaluation practice. Human-generated captions show substantially higher quality than machine-generated ones, especially in coverage of salient information (i.e., recall), while most automatic metrics say the opposite. Our rubric-based results reveal that CLIPScore, a recent metric that uses image features, better correlates with human judgments than conventional text-only metrics because it is more sensitive to recall. We hope that this work will promote a more transparent evaluation protocol for image captioning and its automatic metrics.

Natural language processing researchers have identified limitations of evaluation methodology for generation tasks, with new questions raised about the validity of automatic metrics and of crowdworker judgments. Meanwhile, efforts to improve generation models tend to depend on simple n-gram overlap metrics (e.g., BLEU, ROUGE). We argue that new advances on models and metrics should each more directly benefit and inform the other. We therefore propose a generalization of leaderboards, bidimensional leaderboards (Billboards), that simultaneously tracks progress in language generation models and metrics for their evaluation. Unlike conventional unidimensional leaderboards that sort submitted systems by predetermined metrics, a Billboard accepts both generators and evaluation metrics as competing entries. A Billboard automatically creates an ensemble metric that selects and linearly combines a few metrics based on a global analysis across generators. Further, metrics are ranked based on their correlation with human judgments. We release four Billboards for machine translation, summarization, and image captioning. We demonstrate that a linear ensemble of a few diverse metrics sometimes substantially outperforms existing metrics in isolation. Our mixed-effects model analysis shows that most automatic metrics, especially the reference-based ones, overrate machine over human generation, demonstrating the importance of updating metrics as generation models become stronger (and perhaps more similar to humans) in the future.

Scripts – prototypical event sequences describing everyday activities – have been shown to help understand narratives by providing expectations, resolving ambiguity, and filling in unstated information. However, to date they have proved hard to author or extract from text. In this work, we demonstrate for the first time that pre-trained neural language models can be finetuned to generate high-quality scripts, at varying levels of granularity, for a wide range of everyday scenarios (e.g., bake a cake). To do this, we collect a large (6.4k) crowdsourced partially ordered scripts (named proScript), that is substantially larger than prior datasets, and develop models that generate scripts by combining language generation and graph structure prediction. We define two complementary tasks: (i) edge prediction: given a scenario and unordered events, organize the events into a valid (possibly partial-order) script, and (ii) script generation: given only a scenario, generate events and organize them into a (possibly partial-order) script. Our experiments show that our models perform well (e.g., F1=75.7 on task (i)), illustrating a new approach to overcoming previous barriers to script collection. We also show that there is still significant room for improvement toward human level performance. Together, our tasks, dataset, and models offer a new research direction for learning script knowledge.

We introduce Uncertain Natural Language Inference (UNLI), a refinement of Natural Language Inference (NLI) that shifts away from categorical labels, targeting instead the direct prediction of subjective probability assessments. We demonstrate the feasibility of collecting annotations for UNLI by relabeling a portion of the SNLI dataset under a probabilistic scale, where items even with the same categorical label differ in how likely people judge them to be true given a premise. We describe a direct scalar regression modeling approach, and find that existing categorically-labeled NLI data can be used in pre-training. Our best models correlate well with humans, demonstrating models are capable of more subtle inferences than the categorical bin assignment employed in current NLI tasks.

We present the first dataset for tracking state changes in procedural text from arbitrary domains by using an unrestricted (open) vocabulary. For example, in a text describing fog removal using potatoes, a car window may transition between being foggy, sticky, opaque, and clear. Previous formulations of this task provide the text and entities involved, and ask how those entities change for just a small, pre-defined set of attributes (e.g., location), limiting their fidelity. Our solution is a new task formulation where given just a procedural text as input, the task is to generate a set of state change tuples (entity, attribute, before-state, after-state) for each step, where the entity, attribute, and state values must be predicted from an open vocabulary. Using crowdsourcing, we create OPENPI, a high-quality (91.5% coverage as judged by humans and completely vetted), and large-scale dataset comprising 29,928 state changes over 4,050 sentences from 810 procedural real-world paragraphs from WikiHow.com. A current state-of-the-art generation model on this task achieves 16.1% F1 based on BLEU metric, leaving enough room for novel model architectures.

We present the Universal Decompositional Semantics (UDS) dataset (v1.0), which is bundled with the Decomp toolkit (v0.1). UDS1.0 unifies five high-quality, decompositional semantics-aligned annotation sets within a single semantic graph specification—with graph structures defined by the predicative patterns produced by the PredPatt tool and real-valued node and edge attributes constructed using sophisticated normalization procedures. The Decomp toolkit provides a suite of Python 3 tools for querying UDS graphs using SPARQL. Both UDS1.0 and Decomp0.1 are publicly available at http://decomp.io.

We introduce WIQA, the first large-scale dataset of “What if...” questions over procedural text. WIQA contains a collection of paragraphs, each annotated with multiple influence graphs describing how one change affects another, and a large (40k) collection of “What if...?” multiple-choice questions derived from these. For example, given a paragraph about beach erosion, would stormy weather hasten or decelerate erosion? WIQA contains three kinds of questions: perturbations to steps mentioned in the paragraph; external (out-of-paragraph) perturbations requiring commonsense knowledge; and irrelevant (no effect) perturbations. We find that state-of-the-art models achieve 73.8% accuracy, well below the human performance of 96.3%. We analyze the challenges, in particular tracking chains of influences, and present the dataset as an open challenge to the community.

We describe a novel method for efficiently eliciting scalar annotations for dataset construction and system quality estimation by human judgments. We contrast direct assessment (annotators assign scores to items directly), online pairwise ranking aggregation (scores derive from annotator comparison of items), and a hybrid approach (EASL: Efficient Annotation of Scalar Labels) proposed here. Our proposal leads to increased correlation with ground truth, at far greater annotator efficiency, suggesting this strategy as an improved mechanism for dataset creation and manual system evaluation.

We present a new parallel corpus, JHU FLuency-Extended GUG corpus (JFLEG) for developing and evaluating grammatical error correction (GEC). Unlike other corpora, it represents a broad range of language proficiency levels and uses holistic fluency edits to not only correct grammatical errors but also make the original text more native sounding. We describe the types of corrections made and benchmark four leading GEC systems on this corpus, identifying specific areas in which they do well and how they can improve. JFLEG fulfills the need for a new gold standard to properly assess the current state of GEC.

We propose a neural encoder-decoder model with reinforcement learning (NRL) for grammatical error correction (GEC). Unlike conventional maximum likelihood estimation (MLE), the model directly optimizes towards an objective that considers a sentence-level, task-specific evaluation metric, avoiding the exposure bias issue in MLE. We demonstrate that NRL outperforms MLE both in human and automated evaluation metrics, achieving the state-of-the-art on a fluency-oriented GEC corpus.

We propose a new dependency parsing scheme which jointly parses a sentence and repairs grammatical errors by extending the non-directional transition-based formalism of Goldberg and Elhadad (2010) with three additional actions: SUBSTITUTE, DELETE, INSERT. Because these actions may cause an infinite loop in derivation, we also introduce simple constraints that ensure the parser termination. We evaluate our model with respect to dependency accuracy and grammaticality improvements for ungrammatical sentences, demonstrating the robustness and applicability of our scheme.

The field of grammatical error correction (GEC) has made tremendous bounds in the last ten years, but new questions and obstacles are revealing themselves. In this position paper, we discuss the issues that need to be addressed and provide recommendations for the field to continue to make progress, and propose a new shared task. We invite suggestions and critiques from the audience to make the new shared task a community-driven venture.

The field of grammatical error correction (GEC) has grown substantially in recent years, with research directed at both evaluation metrics and improved system performance against those metrics. One unvisited assumption, however, is the reliance of GEC evaluation on error-coded corpora, which contain specific labeled corrections. We examine current practices and show that GEC’s reliance on such corpora unnaturally constrains annotation and automatic evaluation, resulting in (a) sentences that do not sound acceptable to native speakers and (b) system rankings that do not correlate with human judgments. In light of this, we propose an alternate approach that jettisons costly error coding in favor of unannotated, whole-sentence rewrites. We compare the performance of existing metrics over different gold-standard annotations, and show that automatic evaluation with our new annotation scheme has very strong correlation with expert rankings (ρ = 0.82). As a result, we advocate for a fundamental and necessary shift in the goal of GEC, from correcting small, labeled error types, to producing text that has native fluency.