Existing evaluations of entity linking systems often say little about how the system is going to perform for a particular application. There are two fundamental reasons for this. One is that many evaluations only use aggregate measures (like precision, recall, and F1 score), without a detailed error analysis or a closer look at the results. The other is that all of the widely used benchmarks have strong biases and artifacts, in particular: a strong focus on named entities, an unclear or missing specification of what else counts as an entity mention, poor handling of ambiguities, and an over- or underrepresentation of certain kinds of entities. We provide a more meaningful and fair in-depth evaluation of a variety of existing end-to-end entity linkers. We characterize their strengths and weaknesses and also report on reproducibility aspects. The detailed results of our evaluation can be inspected under https://elevant.cs.uni-freiburg.de/emnlp2023. Our evaluation is based on several widely used benchmarks, which exhibit the problems mentioned above to various degrees, as well as on two new benchmarks, which address the problems mentioned above. The new benchmarks can be found under https://github.com/ad-freiburg/fair-entity-linking-benchmarks.
The goal of whitespace correction is to fix space errors in arbitrary given text. For example, given the text “whi te space correctio nwithTransf or mers”, produce “whitespace correction with Transformers”. We compare two Transformer-based models, a character-level encoder-decoder model and a byte-level encoder-only model. We find that the encoder-only model is both faster and achieves higher quality. We provide an easy-to-use tool that is over 900 times faster than the previous best tool, with the same high quality. Our tool repairs text at a rate of over 200 kB/s on GPU, with a sequence-averaged F1-score ranging from 87.5% for hard-to-correct text up to 99% for text without any spaces.
We consider the following tokenization repair problem: Given a natural language text with any combination of missing or spurious spaces, correct these. Spelling errors can be present, but it’s not part of the problem to correct them. For example, given: “Tispa per isabout token izaionrep air”, compute “Tis paper is about tokenizaion repair”. We identify three key ingredients of high-quality tokenization repair, all missing from previous work: deep language models with a bidirectional component, training the models on text with spelling errors, and making use of the space information already present. Our methods also improve existing spell checkers by fixing not only more tokenization errors but also more spelling errors: once it is clear which characters form a word, it is much easier for them to figure out the correct word. We provide six benchmarks that cover three use cases (OCR errors, text extraction from PDF, human errors) and the cases of partially correct space information and all spaces missing. We evaluate our methods against the best existing methods and a non-trivial baseline. We provide full reproducibility under
https://ad.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/publications.