Recently, NLP models have achieved remarkable progress across a variety of tasks; however, they have also been criticized for being not robust. Many robustness problems can be attributed to models exploiting “spurious correlations”, or “shortcuts” between the training data and the task labels. Most existing work identifies a limited set of task-specific shortcuts via human priors or error analyses, which requires extensive expertise and efforts. In this paper, we aim to automatically identify such spurious correlations in NLP models at scale. We first leverage existing interpretability methods to extract tokens that significantly affect model’s decision process from the input text. We then distinguish “genuine” tokens and “spurious” tokens by analyzing model predictions across multiple corpora and further verify them through knowledge-aware perturbations. We show that our proposed method can effectively and efficiently identify a scalable set of “shortcuts”, and mitigating these leads to more robust models in multiple applications.

Warning: This paper contains content that is offensive and may be upsetting. Biased or toxic speech can be harmful to various demographic groups. Therefore, it is not only important for models to detect these speech, but to also output explanations of why a given text is toxic. Previous literature has mostly focused on classifying and detecting toxic speech, and existing efforts on explaining stereotypes in toxic speech mainly use standard text generation approaches, resulting in generic and repetitive explanations. Building on these prior works, we introduce a novel knowledge-informed encoder-decoder framework to utilize multiple knowledge sources to generate implications of biased text. Experiments show that our knowledge informed models outperform prior state-of-the-art models significantly, and can generate detailed explanations of stereotypes in toxic speech compared to baselines, both quantitatively and qualitatively.