REVIEW 2 cited by
ApplicaAI at SemEval-2020 Task 11: On RoBERTa-CRF, Span CLS and Whether Self-Training Helps Them
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
This paper presents the winning system for the propaganda Technique Classification (TC) task and the second-placed system for the propaganda Span Identification (SI) task. The purpose of TC task was to identify an applied propaganda technique given propaganda text fragment. The goal of SI task was to find specific text fragments which contain at least one propaganda technique. Both of the developed solutions used semi-supervised learning technique of self-training. Interestingly, although CRF is barely used with transformer-based language models, the SI task was approached with RoBERTa-CRF architecture. An ensemble of RoBERTa-based models was proposed for the TC task, with one of them making use of Span CLS layers we introduce in the present paper. In addition to describing the submitted systems, an impact of architectural decisions and training schemes is investigated along with remarks regarding training models of the same or better quality with lower computational budget. Finally, the results of error analysis are presented.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Are Large Language Models Good at Detecting Propaganda?
GPT-4, GPT-3.5, and Claude 3 Opus all underperform a RoBERTa-CRF baseline on fine-grained propaganda detection, though they beat a weaker baseline on some techniques.
-
Bangla Grammatical Error Detection Leveraging Transformer-based Token Classification
A token-classification ensemble of BanglaBERT models with rule-based post-processing detects grammatical errors in Bangla text with a reported Levenshtein distance score of 1.04 (or 1.054, the paper is inconsistent).
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.