Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Revisiting DocRED -- Addressing the False Negative Problem in Relation Extraction

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

arxiv 2205.12696 v3 pith:5CYB6GNC submitted 2022-05-25 cs.CL cs.IR

Revisiting DocRED -- Addressing the False Negative Problem in Relation Extraction

classification cs.CL cs.IR
keywords docreddatasetfalsenegativere-docredrelationannotationconduct
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The DocRED dataset is one of the most popular and widely used benchmarks for document-level relation extraction (RE). It adopts a recommend-revise annotation scheme so as to have a large-scale annotated dataset. However, we find that the annotation of DocRED is incomplete, i.e., false negative samples are prevalent. We analyze the causes and effects of the overwhelming false negative problem in the DocRED dataset. To address the shortcoming, we re-annotate 4,053 documents in the DocRED dataset by adding the missed relation triples back to the original DocRED. We name our revised DocRED dataset Re-DocRED. We conduct extensive experiments with state-of-the-art neural models on both datasets, and the experimental results show that the models trained and evaluated on our Re-DocRED achieve performance improvements of around 13 F1 points. Moreover, we conduct a comprehensive analysis to identify the potential areas for further improvement. Our dataset is publicly available at https://github.com/tonytan48/Re-DocRED.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.