REVIEW 1 cited by
Rethinking Why Intermediate-Task Fine-Tuning Works
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Supplementary Training on Intermediate Labeled-data Tasks (STILTs) is a widely applied technique, which first fine-tunes the pretrained language models on an intermediate task before on the target task of interest. While STILTs is able to further improve the performance of pretrained language models, it is still unclear why and when it works. Previous research shows that those intermediate tasks involving complex inference, such as commonsense reasoning, work especially well for RoBERTa. In this paper, we discover that the improvement from an intermediate task could be orthogonal to it containing reasoning or other complex skills -- a simple real-fake discrimination task synthesized by GPT2 can benefit diverse target tasks. We conduct extensive experiments to study the impact of different factors on STILTs. These findings suggest rethinking the role of intermediate fine-tuning in the STILTs pipeline.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Enhancing Health Mention Classification Performance: A Study on Advancements in Parameter Efficient Tuning
Applying prompt tuning and POS tagger features to health mention classification yields small F1 improvements over plain fine-tuning, but the paper does not compare with actual state-of-the-art systems.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.