REVIEW 1 cited by
Accurate, yet inconsistent? Consistency Analysis on Language Understanding Models
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Consistency, which refers to the capability of generating the same predictions for semantically similar contexts, is a highly desirable property for a sound language understanding model. Although recent pretrained language models (PLMs) deliver outstanding performance in various downstream tasks, they should exhibit consistent behaviour provided the models truly understand language. In this paper, we propose a simple framework named consistency analysis on language understanding models (CALUM)} to evaluate the model's lower-bound consistency ability. Through experiments, we confirmed that current PLMs are prone to generate inconsistent predictions even for semantically identical inputs. We also observed that multi-task training with paraphrase identification tasks is of benefit to improve consistency, increasing the consistency by 13% on average.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Potemkin Understanding in Large Language Models
LLMs frequently pass definition questions yet fail to use the same concepts in classification, generation, and editing tasks, a gap the authors call potemkin understanding.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.