Rationalization is a framework that aims to build self-explanatory NLP models by extracting a subset of human-intelligible pieces of their inputting texts. It involves a cooperative game where a selector selects the most human-intelligible parts of the input as the rationale, followed by a predictor that makes predictions based on these selected rationales. Existing literature uses the cross-entropy between the model’s predictions and the ground-truth labels to measure the informativeness of the selected rationales, guiding the selector to choose better ones. In this study, we first theoretically analyze the objective of rationalization by decomposing it into two parts: the model-agnostic informativeness of the rationale candidates and the predictor’s degree of fit. We then provide various empirical evidence to support that, under this framework, the selector tends to sample from a limited small region, causing the predictor to overfit these localized areas. This results in a significant mismatch between the cross-entropy objective and the informativeness of the rationale candidates, leading to suboptimal solutions. To address this issue, we propose a simple yet effective method that introduces random vicinal1 perturbations to the selected rationale candidates. This approach broadens the predictor’s assessment to a vicinity around the selected rationale candidate. Compared to recent competitive methods, our method significantly improves rationale quality (by up to 6.6%) across six widely used classification datasets. The term “vicinal” is borrowed from vicinal risk minimization (Chapelle et al., 2000); “vicinal” means neighboring or adjacent.

Rationalization is to employ a generator and a predictor to construct a self-explaining NLP model in which the generator selects a subset of human-intelligible pieces of the input text to the following predictor. However, rationalization suffers from two key challenges, i.e., spurious correlation and degeneration, where the predictor overfits the spurious or meaningless pieces solely selected by the not-yet well-trained generator and in turn deteriorates the generator. Although many studies have been proposed to address the two challenges, they are usually designed separately and do not take both of them into account. In this paper, we propose a simple yet effective method named MGR to simultaneously solve the two problems. The key idea of MGR is to employ multiple generators such that the occurrence stability of real pieces is improved and more meaningful pieces are delivered to the predictor. Empirically, we show that MGR improves the F1 score by up to 20.9% as compared to state-of-the-art methods.