Large Transformer-based natural language understanding models have achieved state-of-the-art performance in dialogue systems. However, scarce labeled data for training, the large model size, and low inference speed hinder their deployment in low-resource scenarios. Few-shot learning and knowledge distillation techniques have been introduced to reduce the need for labeled data and computational resources, respectively. However, these techniques are incompatible because few-shot learning trains models using few data, whereas, knowledge distillation requires sufficient data to train smaller, yet competitive models that run on limited computational resources. In this paper, we address the problem of distilling generalizable small models under the few-shot setting for the intent classification task. Considering in-domain and cross-domain few-shot learning scenarios, we introduce an approach for distilling small models that generalize to new intent classes and domains using only a handful of labeled examples. We conduct experiments on public intent classification benchmarks, and observe a slight performance gap between small models and large Transformer-based models. Overall, our results in both few-shot scenarios confirm the generalization ability of the small distilled models while having lower computational costs.

Natural language inherently consists of implicit and underspecified phrases, which represent potential sources of misunderstanding. In this paper, we present a data set of such phrases in English from instructional texts together with multiple possible clarifications. Our data set, henceforth called CLAIRE, is based on a corpus of revision histories from wikiHow, from which we extract human clarifications that resolve an implicit or underspecified phrase. We show how language modeling can be used to generate alternate clarifications, which may or may not be compatible with the human clarification. Based on plausibility judgements for each clarification, we define the task of distinguishing between plausible and implausible clarifications. We provide several baseline models for this task and analyze to what extent different clarifications represent multiple readings as a first step to investigate misunderstandings caused by implicit/underspecified language in instructional texts.

We describe SemEval-2022 Task 7, a shared task on rating the plausibility of clarifications in instructional texts. The dataset for this task consists of manually clarified how-to guides for which we generated alternative clarifications and collected human plausibility judgements. The task of participating systems was to automatically determine the plausibility of a clarification in the respective context. In total, 21 participants took part in this task, with the best system achieving an accuracy of 68.9%. This report summarizes the results and findings from 8 teams and their system descriptions. Finally, we show in an additional evaluation that predictions by the top participating team make it possible to identify contexts with multiple plausible clarifications with an accuracy of 75.2%.