Despite recent explosion of interests in in-context learning, the underlying mechanism and the precise impact of the quality of demonstrations remain elusive.Intuitively, ground-truth labels should have as much impact in in-context learning (ICL) as supervised learning, but recent work reported that the input-label correspondence is significantly less important than previously thought.Intrigued by this counter-intuitive observation, we re-examine the importance of ground-truth labels in in-context learning.With the introduction of two novel metrics, namely Label-Correctness Sensitivity and Ground-truth Label Effect Ratio (GLER), we were able to conduct quantifiable analysis on the impact of ground-truth label demonstrations.Through extensive analyses, we find that the correct input-label mappings can have varying impacts on the downstream in-context learning performances, depending on the experimental configuration.Through additional studies, we identify key components, such as the verbosity of prompt templates and the language model size, as the controlling factor to achieve more noise-resilient ICL.

We present a new form of ensemble method–Devil’s Advocate, which uses a deliberately dissenting model to force other submodels within the ensemble to better collaborate. Our method consists of two different training settings: one follows the conventional training process (Norm), and the other is trained by artificially generated labels (DevAdv). After training the models, Norm models are fine-tuned through an additional loss function, which uses the DevAdv model as a constraint. In making a final decision, the proposed ensemble model sums the scores of Norm models and then subtracts the score of the DevAdv model. The DevAdv model improves the overall performance of the other models within the ensemble. In addition to our ensemble framework being based on psychological background, it also shows comparable or improved performance on 5 text classification tasks when compared to conventional ensemble methods.

Natural language models often fall short when understanding and generating mathematical notation. What is not clear is whether these shortcomings are due to fundamental limitations of the models, or the absence of appropriate tasks. In this paper, we explore the extent to which natural language models can learn semantics between mathematical notation and their surrounding text. We propose two notation prediction tasks, and train a model that selectively masks notation tokens and encodes left and/or right sentences as context. Compared to baseline models trained by masked language modeling, our method achieved significantly better performance at the two tasks, showing that this approach is a good first step towards modeling mathematical texts. However, the current models rarely predict unseen symbols correctly, and token-level predictions are more accurate than symbol-level predictions, indicating more work is needed to represent structural patterns. Based on the results, we suggest future works toward modeling mathematical texts.

We propose a novel and simple method for semi-supervised text classification. The method stems from the hypothesis that a classifier with pretrained word embeddings always outperforms the same classifier with randomly initialized word embeddings, as empirically observed in NLP tasks. Our method first builds two sets of classifiers as a form of model ensemble, and then initializes their word embeddings differently: one using random, the other using pretrained word embeddings. We focus on different predictions between the two classifiers on unlabeled data while following the self-training framework. We also use early-stopping in meta-epoch to improve the performance of our method. Our method, Delta-training, outperforms the self-training and the co-training framework in 4 different text classification datasets, showing robustness against error accumulation.

We propose post-processing method for enriching not only word representation but also its vector space using semantic lexicons, which we call extrofitting. The method consists of 3 steps as follows: (i) Expanding 1 or more dimension(s) on all the word vectors, filling with their representative value. (ii) Transferring semantic knowledge by averaging each representative values of synonyms and filling them in the expanded dimension(s). These two steps make representations of the synonyms close together. (iii) Projecting the vector space using Linear Discriminant Analysis, which eliminates the expanded dimension(s) with semantic knowledge. When experimenting with GloVe, we find that our method outperforms Faruqui’s retrofitting on some of word similarity task. We also report further analysis on our method in respect to word vector dimensions, vocabulary size as well as other well-known pretrained word vectors (e.g., Word2Vec, Fasttext).