Roni Friedman


2023

pdf
Benchmark Data and Evaluation Framework for Intent Discovery Around COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy
Shai Gretz | Assaf Toledo | Roni Friedman | Dan Lahav | Rose Weeks | Naor Bar-Zeev | João Sedoc | Pooja Sangha | Yoav Katz | Noam Slonim
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EACL 2023

The COVID-19 pandemic has made a huge global impact and cost millions of lives. As COVID-19 vaccines were rolled out, they were quickly met with widespread hesitancy. To address the concerns of hesitant people, we launched VIRA, a public dialogue system aimed at addressing questions and concerns surrounding the COVID-19 vaccines. Here, we release VIRADialogs, a dataset of over 8k dialogues conducted by actual users with VIRA, providing a unique real-world conversational dataset. In light of rapid changes in users’ intents, due to updates in guidelines or in response to new information, we highlight the important task of intent discovery in this use-case. We introduce a novel automatic evaluation framework for intent discovery, leveraging the existing intent classifier of VIRA. We use this framework to report baseline intent discovery results over VIRADialogs, that highlight the difficulty of this task.

pdf
The Benefits of Bad Advice: Autocontrastive Decoding across Model Layers
Ariel Gera | Roni Friedman | Ofir Arviv | Chulaka Gunasekara | Benjamin Sznajder | Noam Slonim | Eyal Shnarch
Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)

Applying language models to natural language processing tasks typically relies on the representations in the final model layer, as intermediate hidden layer representations are presumed to be less informative. In this work, we argue that due to the gradual improvement across model layers, additional information can be gleaned from the contrast between higher and lower layers during inference. Specifically, in choosing between the probable next token predictions of a generative model, the predictions of lower layers can be used to highlight which candidates are best avoided. We propose a novel approach that utilizes the contrast between layers to improve text generation outputs, and show that it mitigates degenerative behaviors of the model in open-ended generation, significantly improving the quality of generated texts. Furthermore, our results indicate that contrasting between model layers at inference time can yield substantial benefits to certain aspects of general language model capabilities, more effectively extracting knowledge during inference from a given set of model parameters.

2021

pdf
Overview of the 2021 Key Point Analysis Shared Task
Roni Friedman | Lena Dankin | Yufang Hou | Ranit Aharonov | Yoav Katz | Noam Slonim
Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Argument Mining

We describe the 2021 Key Point Analysis (KPA-2021) shared task on key point analysis that we organized as a part of the 8th Workshop on Argument Mining (ArgMining 2021) at EMNLP 2021. We outline various approaches and discuss the results of the shared task. We expect the task and the findings reported in this paper to be relevant for researchers working on text summarization and argument mining.

pdf
Every Bite Is an Experience: Key Point Analysis of Business Reviews
Roy Bar-Haim | Lilach Eden | Yoav Kantor | Roni Friedman | Noam Slonim
Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers)

Previous work on review summarization focused on measuring the sentiment toward the main aspects of the reviewed product or business, or on creating a textual summary. These approaches provide only a partial view of the data: aspect-based sentiment summaries lack sufficient explanation or justification for the aspect rating, while textual summaries do not quantify the significance of each element, and are not well-suited for representing conflicting views. Recently, Key Point Analysis (KPA) has been proposed as a summarization framework that provides both textual and quantitative summary of the main points in the data. We adapt KPA to review data by introducing Collective Key Point Mining for better key point extraction; integrating sentiment analysis into KPA; identifying good key point candidates for review summaries; and leveraging the massive amount of available reviews and their metadata. We show empirically that these novel extensions of KPA substantially improve its performance. We demonstrate that promising results can be achieved without any domain-specific annotation, while human supervision can lead to further improvement.

2020

pdf
From Arguments to Key Points: Towards Automatic Argument Summarization
Roy Bar-Haim | Lilach Eden | Roni Friedman | Yoav Kantor | Dan Lahav | Noam Slonim
Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Generating a concise summary from a large collection of arguments on a given topic is an intriguing yet understudied problem. We propose to represent such summaries as a small set of talking points, termed key points, each scored according to its salience. We show, by analyzing a large dataset of crowd-contributed arguments, that a small number of key points per topic is typically sufficient for covering the vast majority of the arguments. Furthermore, we found that a domain expert can often predict these key points in advance. We study the task of argument-to-key point mapping, and introduce a novel large-scale dataset for this task. We report empirical results for an extensive set of experiments with this dataset, showing promising performance.

pdf
Quantitative argument summarization and beyond: Cross-domain key point analysis
Roy Bar-Haim | Yoav Kantor | Lilach Eden | Roni Friedman | Dan Lahav | Noam Slonim
Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP)

When summarizing a collection of views, arguments or opinions on some topic, it is often desirable not only to extract the most salient points, but also to quantify their prevalence. Work on multi-document summarization has traditionally focused on creating textual summaries, which lack this quantitative aspect. Recent work has proposed to summarize arguments by mapping them to a small set of expert-generated key points, where the salience of each key point corresponds to the number of its matching arguments. The current work advances key point analysis in two important respects: first, we develop a method for automatic extraction of key points, which enables fully automatic analysis, and is shown to achieve performance comparable to a human expert. Second, we demonstrate that the applicability of key point analysis goes well beyond argumentation data. Using models trained on publicly available argumentation datasets, we achieve promising results in two additional domains: municipal surveys and user reviews. An additional contribution is an in-depth evaluation of argument-to-key point matching models, where we substantially outperform previous results.

2019

pdf
Automatic Argument Quality Assessment - New Datasets and Methods
Assaf Toledo | Shai Gretz | Edo Cohen-Karlik | Roni Friedman | Elad Venezian | Dan Lahav | Michal Jacovi | Ranit Aharonov | Noam Slonim
Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP)

We explore the task of automatic assessment of argument quality. To that end, we actively collected 6.3k arguments, more than a factor of five compared to previously examined data. Each argument was explicitly and carefully annotated for its quality. In addition, 14k pairs of arguments were annotated independently, identifying the higher quality argument in each pair. In spite of the inherent subjective nature of the task, both annotation schemes led to surprisingly consistent results. We release the labeled datasets to the community. Furthermore, we suggest neural methods based on a recently released language model, for argument ranking as well as for argument-pair classification. In the former task, our results are comparable to state-of-the-art; in the latter task our results significantly outperform earlier methods.