Intent classifiers must be able to distinguish when a user’s utterance does not belong to any supported intent to avoid producing incorrect and unrelated system responses. Although out-of-scope (OOS) detection for intent classifiers has been studied, previous work has not yet studied changes in classifier performance against hard-negative out-of-scope utterances (i.e., inputs that share common features with in-scope data, but are actually out-of-scope). We present an automated technique to generate hard-negative OOS data using ChatGPT. We use our technique to build five new hard-negative OOS datasets, and evaluate each against three benchmark intent classifiers. We show that classifiers struggle to correctly identify hard-negative OOS utterances more than general OOS utterances. Finally, we show that incorporating hard-negative OOS data for training improves model robustness when detecting hard-negative OOS data and general OOS data. Our technique, datasets, and evaluation address an important void in the field, offering a straightforward and inexpensive way to collect hard-negative OOS data and improve intent classifiers’ robustness.

Warning: This paper contains explicit statements of offensive stereotypes which may be upsetting The study of bias, fairness and social impact in Natural Language Processing (NLP) lacks resources in languages other than English. Our objective is to support the evaluation of bias in language models in a multilingual setting. We use stereotypes across nine types of biases to build a corpus containing contrasting sentence pairs, one sentence that presents a stereotype concerning an underadvantaged group and another minimally changed sentence, concerning a matching advantaged group. We build on the French CrowS-Pairs corpus and guidelines to provide translations of the existing material into seven additional languages. In total, we produce 11,139 new sentence pairs that cover stereotypes dealing with nine types of biases in seven cultural contexts. We use the final resource for the evaluation of relevant monolingual and multilingual masked language models. We find that language models in all languages favor sentences that express stereotypes in most bias categories. The process of creating a resource that covers a wide range of language types and cultural settings highlights the difficulty of bias evaluation, in particular comparability across languages and contexts.