Mexico

*Do larger and more performant models resolve NLP&#39;s longstanding robustness issues?* We investigate this question using over 20 models of different sizes spanning different architectural choices and pretraining objectives. We conduct evaluations using (a) out-of-domain and challenge test sets, (b) behavioral testing with CheckLists, (c) contrast sets, and (d) adversarial inputs. Our analysis reveals that not all out-of-domain tests provide insight into robustness. Evaluating with CheckLists and contrast sets shows significant gaps in model performance; merely scaling models does not make them adequately robust. Finally, we point out that current approaches for adversarial evaluations of models are themselves problematic: they can be easily thwarted, and in their current forms, do not represent a sufficiently deep probe of model robustness. We conclude that not only is the question of robustness in NLP as yet unresolved, but even some of the approaches to measure robustness need to be reassessed.

NAACL 2024

Whispers of Doubt Amidst Echoes of Triumph in NLP Robustness

scaling

robustness

language models

*Do larger and more performant models resolve NLP's longstanding robustness issues?* We investigate this question using over 20 models of different sizes spanning different architectural choices and pretraining objectives. We conduct evaluations using (a) out-of-domain and challenge test sets, (b) behavioral testing with CheckLists, (c) contrast sets, and (d) adversarial inputs. Our analysis reveals that not all out-of-domain tests provide insight into robustness. Evaluating with CheckLists and contrast sets shows significant gaps in model performance; merely scaling models does not make them adequately robust. Finally, we point out that current approaches for adversarial evaluations of models are themselves problematic: they can be easily thwarted, and in their current forms, do not represent a sufficiently deep probe of model robustness. We conclude that not only is the question of robustness in NLP as yet unresolved, but even some of the approaches to measure robustness need to be reassessed.

poster

## Welcome to 2024 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics!
This year, the conference is in Mexico City. NAACL was actually already planned for Mexico City in 2021, but due to the pandemic the entire conference was moved online. This year, finally, we get to go! So it is my sincere pleasure to welcome you to Mexico City, whether in person or virtually. Having the conference in Mexico City is a good opportunity to emphasize that NAACL is our flagship conference for ACL members not only in North America but also in Central and South America, even though NAACL has been bearing “North” in its name. At this year’s conference, we have a theme to match, with a theme track on the Languages of Latin America to showcase the linguistic diversity of the region.
 
The opportunity to present at NAACL should not depend on a researcher’s travel budget, or their family status. This is why it is so important to make virtual participation at NAACL as good an experience as possible – but we want to also provide a good experience for in-person participants. As a community, we are still working out the best way to do that. This year at NAACL, we are trying out a big virtual poster session ahead of the conference, with the hope that this will make make for a lively and interactive experience. At the same time, we are reducing virtual oral presentations, which seem to be particularly tricky to make to work well. A big thanks to the NAACL program chairs and to Luciana Benotti for all their ideas and work to improve the virtual experience. And participants, virtual as well as in-person: Please let us know what worked for you and what didn’t, so we can continue to improve hybrid conferences. 
 
I have been lucky to work with many amazing people. Without their insight, dedication and patience, and without the many hours of work they put in, NAACL would not have been possible. A huge thank you to the program chairs Helena Gomez, Kevin Duh, and Steve Bethard – you are the best! 
 
Finally, I would like to thank all authors, invited speakers and panelists, area chairs and reviewers, the volunteers organizing and chairing sessions, and all attendees, in-person and virtual. Thank you for helping us make NAACL 2024 come to life. 
 
Welcome and hope you all enjoy the conference! 
Katrin Erk 
The University of Texas at Austin 
NAACL-2024 General Chair 
*You can read the full Welcome message in the [Conference Handbook (downloadable)](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1H1NvW0VASQjkSCYgw3mr-3l4yYDSxz6B/view?usp=sharing)*

To access the event page you need to register [**here.**](http://acl.swoogo.com/naacl2024) 
Your access to the event page is limited based on your registration type. If you registered for workshops only, you will gain access to full workshops content on the day of the workshops program.

Please register!

2024 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

In-context learning (ICL) has become one of the most popular learning paradigms. While there is a growing body of literature focusing on prompt engineering, there is a lack of systematic analysis comparing the effects of prompt techniques across different models and tasks. To address this, we present a comprehensive prompt analysis based on sensitivity. Our analysis reveals that sensitivity is an unsupervised proxy for model performance, as it exhibits a strong negative correlation with accuracy. We use gradient-based saliency scores to empirically demonstrate how different prompts affect the relevance of input tokens to the output, resulting in different levels of sensitivity. Furthermore, we introduce sensitivity-aware decoding which incorporates sensitivity estimation as a penalty term in the standard greedy decoding. We show that this approach is particularly helpful when information in the input is scarce. Our work provides a fresh perspective on the analysis of prompts, and contributes to a better understanding of the mechanism of ICL.

How are Prompts Different in Terms of Sensitivity?

Recent work has compared neural network representations via similarity-based analyses to improve model interpretation. The quality of a similarity measure is typically evaluated by its success in assigning a high score to representations that are expected to be matched. However, existing similarity measures perform mediocrely on standard benchmarks. In this work, we develop a new similarity measure, dubbed ContraSim, based on contrastive learning. In contrast to common closed-form similarity measures, ContraSim learns a parameterized measure by using both similar and dissimilar examples. We perform an extensive experimental evaluation of our method, with both language and vision models, on the standard layer prediction benchmark and two new benchmarks that we introduce: the multilingual benchmark and the image--caption benchmark. In all cases, ContraSim achieves much higher accuracy than previous similarity measures, even when presented with challenging examples. Finally, ContraSim is more suitable for the analysis of neural networks, revealing new insights not captured by previous measures.

ContraSim – Analyzing Neural Representations Based on Contrastive Learning

Bias amplification is a phenomenon in which models exacerbate biases or stereotypes present in the training data. In this paper, we study bias amplification in the text-to-image domain using Stable Diffusion by comparing gender ratios in training vs. generated images. We find that the model appears to amplify gender-occupation biases found in the training data (LAION) considerably. However, we discover that amplification can be largely attributed to discrepancies between training captions and model prompts. For example, an inherent difference is that captions from the training data often contain explicit gender information while our prompts do not, which leads to a distribution shift and consequently inflates bias measures. Once we account for distributional differences between texts used for training and generation when evaluating amplification, we observe that amplification decreases drastically. Our findings illustrate the challenges of comparing biases in models and their training data, as well as evaluation more broadly, and highlight how confounding factors can impact analyses.

The Bias Amplification Paradox in Text-to-Image Generation

Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable adaptability to diverse tasks, by leveraging context prompts containing instructions, or minimal input-output examples. However, recent work revealed they also exhibit *label bias*---an undesirable preference toward predicting certain answers over others. Still, detecting and measuring this bias reliably and at scale has remained relatively unexplored. In this study, we evaluate different approaches to quantifying label bias in a model's predictions, conducting a comprehensive investigation across 279 classification tasks and ten LLMs. Our investigation reveals substantial label bias in models both before and after debiasing attempts, as well as highlights the importance of outcomes-based evaluation metrics, which were not previously used in this regard. We further propose a novel label bias calibration method tailored for few-shot prompting, which outperforms recent calibration approaches for both improving performance and mitigating label bias. Our results emphasize that label bias in the predictions of LLMs remains a barrier to their reliability.

Beyond Performance: Quantifying and Mitigating Label Bias in LLMs

The recent successes and spread of large neural language models (LMs) call for a thorough understanding of their abilities. Describing their abilities through LMs’ representational capacity is a lively area of research. Investigations of the representational capacity of neural LMs have predominantly focused on their ability to recognize formal languages. For example, recurrent neural networks (RNNs) as classifiers are tightly linked to regular languages, i.e., languages defined by finite-state automata (FSAs). Such results, however, fall short of describing the capabilities of RNN language models (LMs), which are definitionally distributions over strings. We take a fresh look at the represen- tational capacity of RNN LMs by connecting them to probabilistic FSAs and demonstrate that RNN LMs with linearly bounded precision can express arbitrary regular LMs.

On the Relationship Between Non-deterministic FSLMs and RNN LMs

Plenty of existing work has analyzed the abilities of the transformer architecture by describing its representational capacity with formal models of computation. However, the focus so far has been on analyzing the architecture in terms of language \emph{acceptance}. We contend that this is an ill-suited problem in the study of \emph{language models} (LMs), which are definitionally \emph{probability distributions} over strings. In this paper, we focus on the relationship between transformer LMs and $n$-gram LMs, a simple and historically relevant class of language models. We show that transformer LMs using the hard or sparse attention mechanisms can exactly represent any $n$-gram LM, giving us a concrete lower bound on their probabilistic representational capacity. This provides a first step towards understanding the mechanisms that transformer LMs can use to represent probability distributions over strings.

Transformers Can Represent n-gram Language Models

For nearly three decades, language models derived from the $n$-gram assumption held the state of the art on the task. The key to their success lay in the application of various smoothing techniques that served to combat overfitting. However, when neural language models toppled $n$-gram models as the best performers, $n$-gram smoothing techniques became less relevant. Indeed, it would hardly be an understatement to suggest that the line of inquiry into $n$-gram smoothing techniques became dormant. This paper re-opens the role classical $n$-gram smoothing techniques may play in the age of neural language models. First, we draw a formal equivalence between label smoothing, a popular regularization technique for neural language models, and add-$\lambda$ smoothing. Second, we derive a generalized framework for converting any $n$-gram smoothing technique into a regularizer compatible with neural language models. Our empirical results find that our novel regularizers are comparable to and, indeed, sometimes outperform label smoothing on language modeling and machine translation.

The Role of n-gram Smoothing in the Age of Neural Networks

Current decoder-based pre-trained language models (PLMs) successfully demonstrate multilingual capabilities. However, it is unclear how these models handle multilingualism. We analyze the neuron-level internal behavior of multilingual decoder-based PLMs, Specifically examining the existence of neurons that fire ``uniquely for each language'' within decoder-only multilingual PLMs. We analyze six languages: English, German, French, Spanish, Chinese, and Japanese, and show that language-specific neurons are unique, with a slight overlap (< 5%) between languages. These neurons are mainly distributed in the models' first and last few layers. This trend remains consistent across languages and models. Additionally, we tamper with less than 1% of the total neurons in each model during inference and demonstrate that tampering with a few language-specific neurons drastically changes the probability of target language occurrence in text generation.

On the Multilingual Ability of Decoder-based Pre-trained Language Models: Finding and Controlling Language-Specific Neurons

Many diagnostic errors occur because clinicians cannot easily access relevant information in patient Electronic Health Records (EHRs). In this work we propose a method to use LLMs to identify pieces of evidence in patient EHR data that indicate increased or decreased risk of specific diagnoses; our ultimate aim is to increase access to evidence and reduce diagnostic errors. In particular, we propose a Neural Additive Model to make predictions backed by evidence with individualized risk estimates at time-points where clinicians are still uncertain, aiming to specifically mitigate delays in diagnosis and errors stemming from an incomplete differential. To train such a model, it is necessary to infer temporally fine-grained retrospective labels of eventual “true” diagnoses. We do so with LLMs, to ensure that the input text is from before a confident diagnosis can be made. We use an LLM to retrieve an initial pool of evidence, but then refine this set of evidence according to correlations learned by the model. We conduct an in-depth evaluation of the usefulness of our approach by simulating how it might be used by a clinician to decide between a pre-defined list of differential diagnoses.

Towards Reducing Diagnostic Errors with Interpretable Risk Prediction

To process novel sentences, language models (LMs) must generalize compositionally---combine familiar elements in new ways. What aspects of a model's structure promote compositional generalization? Focusing on transformers, we test the hypothesis, motivated by theoretical and empirical work, that deeper transformers generalize more compositionally. Simply adding layers increases the total number of parameters; to address this confound between depth and size, we construct three classes of models which trade off depth for width such that the total number of parameters is kept constant (41M, 134M and 374M parameters). We pretrain all models as LMs and fine-tune them on tasks that test for compositional generalization. We report three main conclusions: (1) after fine-tuning, deeper models generalize more compositionally than shallower models do, but the benefit of additional layers diminishes rapidly; (2) within each family, deeper models show better language modeling performance, but returns are similarly diminishing; (3) the benefits of depth for compositional generalization cannot be attributed solely to better performance on language modeling. Because model latency is approximately linear in the number of layers, these results lead us to the recommendation that, with a given total parameter budget, transformers can be made shallower than is typical without sacrificing performance.

Premium content

Whispers of Doubt Amidst Echoes of Triumph in NLP Robustness

Downloads

Next from NAACL 2024

How are Prompts Different in Terms of Sensitivity?

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES