This study explores current limitations of learned image captioning evaluation metrics, specifically the lack of granular assessment for individual word misalignments within captions, and the reliance on single-point quality estimates without considering uncertainty. To address these limitations, we propose a simple yet effective strategy for generating and calibrating CLIPScore distributions. Leveraging a model-agnostic conformal risk control framework, we calibrate CLIPScore values for task-specific control variables, to tackle the aforementioned two limitations. Experimental results demonstrate that using conformal risk control, over the distributions produced with simple methods such as input masking, can achieve competitive performance compared to more complex approaches. Our method effectively detects misaligned words, while providing formal guarantees aligned with desired risk levels, and improving the correlation between uncertainty estimations and prediction errors, thus enhancing the overall reliability of caption evaluation metrics.

A Conformal Risk Control Framework for Granular Word Assessment and Uncertainty Calibration of CLIPScore Quality Estimates

The evaluation of image captions, looking at both linguistic fluency and semantic correspondence to visual contents, has witnessed a significant effort. Still, despite advancements such as the CLIPScore metric, multilingual captioning evaluation has remained relatively unexplored. This work presents several strategies, and extensive experiments, related to evaluating CLIPScore variants in multilingual settings. To address the lack of multilingual test data, we consider two different strategies: (1) using quality aware machine-translated datasets with human judgements, and (2) re-purposing multilingual datasets that target semantic inference and reasoning. Our results highlight the potential of finetuned multilingual models to generalize across languages and to handle complex linguistic challenges. Tests with machine-translated data show that multilingual CLIPScore models can maintain a high correlation with human judgements across different languages, and additional tests with natively multilingual and multicultural data further attest to the high-quality assessments.

Evaluation of Multilingual Image Captioning: How far can we get with CLIP models?

Preference alignment via reward models helps build safe, helpful, and reliable large language models (LLMs). However, subjectivity in preference judgments and the lack of representative sampling in preference data collection can introduce new biases, hindering reward models' fairness and equity. In this work, we introduce a framework for evaluating dialect biases in reward models and conduct a case study on biases against African American Language (AAL) through several experiments comparing reward model preferences and behavior on paired White Mainstream English (WME) and both machine-translated and human-written AAL corpora. We show that reward models are less aligned with human preferences when processing AAL texts vs. WME ones (-4\% accuracy on average), frequently disprefer AAL-aligned texts vs. WME-aligned ones, and steer conversations toward WME, even when prompted with AAL texts. Our findings provide a targeted analysis of anti-AAL biases at a relatively understudied stage in LLM development, highlighting representational harms and ethical questions about the desired behavior of LLMs concerning AAL.

Rejected Dialects: Biases Against African American Language in Reward Models

Equivocation and ambiguity in public speech are well-studied discourse phenomena, especially in political science and analysis of political interviews. Inspired by the well-grounded theory on equivocation, we aim to resolve the closely related problem of response clarity in questions extracted from political interviews, leveraging the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) and human expertise. To this end, we introduce a novel taxonomy that frames the task of detecting and classifying response clarity and a corresponding clarity classification dataset which consists of question-answer (QA) pairs drawn from political interviews and annotated accordingly. Our proposed two-level taxonomy addresses the clarity of a response in terms of the information provided for a given question (high-level) and also provides a fine-grained taxonomy of evasion techniques that relate to unclear, ambiguous responses (lower-level). We combine ChatGPT and human annotators to collect, validate and annotate discrete QA pairs from political interviews, to be used for our newly introduced response clarity task. We provide a detailed analysis and conduct several experiments with different model architectures, sizes and adaptation methods to gain insights and establish new baselines over the proposed dataset and task.

”I Never Said That”: A dataset, taxonomy and baselines on response clarity classification

Quantifying uncertainty in automatically generated text is important for letting humans check potential hallucinations and making systems more reliable. Conformal prediction is an attractive framework to provide predictions imbued with statistical guarantees, however, its application to text generation is challenging since any i.i.d. assumptions are not realistic. In this paper, we bridge this gap by leveraging recent results on *non-exchangeable* conformal prediction, which still ensures bounds on coverage. The result, *non-exchangeable conformal nucleus sampling*, is a novel extension of the conformal prediction framework to generation based on nearest neighbors. Our method can be used post-hoc for an arbitrary model without extra training and supplies token-level, calibrated prediction sets equipped with statistical guarantees. Experiments in machine translation and language modeling show encouraging results in generation quality. By also producing tighter prediction sets with good coverage, we thus give a more theoretically principled way to perform sampling with conformal guarantees.

Non-Exchangeable Conformal Language Generation with Nearest Neighbors

In the wake of responsible AI, interpretability methods, which attempt to provide an explanation for the predictions of neural models have seen rapid progress. In this work, we are concerned with explanations that are applicable to natural language processing (NLP) models and tasks, and we focus specifically on the analysis of counterfactual, contrastive explanations. We note that while there have been several explainers proposed to produce counterfactual explanations, their behaviour can vary significantly and the lack of a universal ground truth for the counterfactual edits imposes an insuperable barrier on their evaluation. We propose a new back translation-inspired evaluation methodology that utilises earlier outputs of the explainer as ground truth proxies to investigate the consistency of explainers. We show that by iteratively feeding the counterfactual to the explainer we can obtain valuable insights into the behaviour of both the predictor and the explainer models, and infer patterns that would be otherwise obscured. Using this methodology, we conduct a thorough analysis and propose a novel metric to evaluate the consistency of counterfactual generation approaches with different characteristics across available performance indicators.

<iframe src="https://app.sli.do/event/eX4PwSmcCc1EvCqjxcYdKB/embed/polls/b07bf2b4-5686-4b6d-acc6-b42e85725a9d" width="300" height="400"></iframe>

Counterfactuals of Counterfactuals: a back-translation-inspired approach to analyse counterfactual editors

Trainable evaluation metrics for machine translation (MT) exhibit strong correlation with human judgements, but they are often hard to interpret and might produce unreliable scores 
under noisy or out-of-domain data. 
Recent work has attempted to mitigate this with simple uncertainty quantification techniques (Monte Carlo dropout and deep ensembles), however these techniques (as we show) are limited in several ways – for example, they are unable to distinguish between different kinds of uncertainty, and they are time and memory consuming. 
In this paper, we propose more powerful and efficient uncertainty predictors for MT evaluation, and we assess their ability to target different sources of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty. 
To this end, we develop and compare training objectives for the COMET metric to enhance it with an uncertainty prediction output, including heteroscedastic regression, divergence minimization, and direct uncertainty prediction.
Our experiments show improved results on uncertainty prediction for the WMT metrics task datasets, with a substantial reduction in computational costs. Moreover, they demonstrate the ability of these predictors to address specific uncertainty causes in MT evaluation, such as low quality references and 
out-of-domain data.

Disentangling Uncertainty in Machine Translation Evaluation

Negation and uncertainty modeling are longstanding tasks in natural language processing. Linguistic theory postulates that expressions of negation and uncertainty are semantically independent from each other and the content they modify. However, previous works on representation learning do not explicitly model this independence. We therefore attempt to disentangle the representations of negation, uncertainty, and content using a Variational Autoencoder.
We find that simply supervising the latent representations results in good disentanglement, but auxiliary objectives based on adversarial learning and mutual information minimization can provide additional disentanglement gains.

Learning Disentangled Representations of Negation and Uncertainty

Several neural-based metrics have been recently proposed to evaluate machine translation quality. However, all of them resort to point estimates, which provide limited information at segment level. This is made worse as they are trained on noisy, biased and scarce human judgements, often resulting in unreliable quality predictions.
In this paper, we introduce uncertainty-aware MT evaluation and analyze the trustworthiness of the predicted quality.
We combine the COMET framework with two uncertainty estimation methods, Monte Carlo dropout and deep ensembles, to obtain quality scores along with confidence intervals. 
We compare the performance of our uncertainty-aware MT evaluation methods across multiple language pairs from the QT21 dataset and the WMT20 metrics task, augmented with MQM annotations. We experiment with varying numbers of references and further discuss the usefulness of uncertainty-aware quality estimation (without references) to flag possibly critical translation mistakes.

Uncertainty-Aware Machine Translation Evaluation

In this paper, we present the joint contribution of Unbabel and IST to the WMT 2021 Metrics Shared Task. With this year's focus on Multidimensional Quality Metric (MQM) as the ground-truth human assessment, our aim was to steer COMET towards higher correlations with MQM. We do so by first pre-training on Direct Assessments and then fine-tuning on z-normalized MQM scores. In our experiments we also show that reference-free COMET models are becoming competitive with reference-based models, even outperforming the best COMET model from 2020 on this year's development data. Additionally, we present COMETinho, a lightweight COMET model that is 19x faster on CPU than the original model, while also achieving state-of-the-art correlations with MQM. Finally, in the "QE as a metric'' track, we also participated with a QE model trained using the OpenKiwi framework leveraging MQM scores and word-level annotations.

Are References Really Needed? Unbabel-IST 2021 Submission for the Metrics Shared Task

We present the joint contribution of IST and Unbabel to the WMT 2021 Shared Task on Quality Estimation. Our team participated on two tasks: Direct Assessment and Post-Editing Effort, encompassing a total of 35 submissions. For all submissions, our efforts focused on training multilingual models on top of OpenKiwi predictor-estimator architecture, using pre-trained multilingual encoders combined with adapters. We further experiment with and uncertainty-related objectives and features as well as training on out-of-domain direct assessment data.

IST-Unbabel 2021 Submission for the Quality Estimation Shared Task

We report the results of the WMT 2021 shared task on Quality Estimation, where the challenge is to predict the quality of the output of neural machine translation systems at the word and sentence levels. This edition focused on two main novel additions: (i) prediction for unseen languages, i.e. zero-shot settings, and (ii) prediction of sentences with catastrophic errors. In addition, new data was released for a number of languages, especially post-edited data. Participating teams from 19 institutions submitted altogether 1263 systems to different task variants and language pairs.

Findings of the WMT 2021 Shared Task on Quality Estimation

Several neural-based metrics have been recently proposed to evaluate machine translation quality. However, all of them resort to point estimates, which provide limited information at segment level. This is made worse as they are trained on noisy, biased and scarce human judgements, often resulting in unreliable quality predictions.
In this paper, we introduce uncertainty-aware MT evaluation and analyze the trustworthiness of the predicted quality.
We combine the COMET framework with two uncertainty estimation methods, Monte Carlo dropout and deep ensembles, to obtain quality scores along with confidence intervals. 
We compare the performance of our uncertainty-aware MT evaluation methods across multiple language pairs from the QT21 dataset and the WMT20 metrics task, augmented with MQM annotations. We experiment with varying numbers of references and further discuss the usefulness of uncertainty-aware quality estimation (without references) to flag possibly critical translation mistakes.

Chrysoula Zerva

13

27

1

SHORT BIO

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES