Automated coherence metrics constitute an important and popular way to evaluate topic models. Previous works present a mixed picture of their presumed correlation with human judgement. In this paper, we conduct a large-scale correlation analysis of coherence metrics. We propose a novel sampling approach to mine topics for the purpose of metric evaluation, and conduct the analysis via three large corpora showing that certain automated coherence metrics are correlated. Moreover, we extend the analysis to measure topical differences between corpora. Lastly, we examine the reliability of human judgement by conducting an extensive user study, which is designed as an amalgamation of different proxy tasks to derive a finer insight into the human decision-making processes. Our findings reveal some correlation between automated coherence metrics and human judgement, especially for generic corpora.

Topic Modelling is an established research area where the quality of a given topic is measured using coherence metrics. Often, we infer topics from Neural Topic Models (NTM) by interpreting their decoder weights, consisting of top-activated words projected from individual neurons. Transformer-based Language Models (TLM) similarly consist of decoder weights. However, due to its hypothesised superposition properties, the final logits originating from the residual path are considered uninterpretable. Therefore, we posit that we can interpret TLM as superposed NTM by proposing a novel weight-based, model-agnostic and corpus-agnostic approach to search and disentangle decoder-only TLM, potentially mapping individual neurons to multiple coherent topics. Our results show that it is empirically feasible to disentangle coherent topics from GPT-2 models using the Wikipedia corpus. We validate this approach for GPT-2 models using Zero-Shot Topic Modelling. Finally, we extend the proposed approach to disentangle and analyse LLaMA models.

Most Neural Topic Models (NTM) use a variational auto-encoder framework producing K topics limited to the size of the encoder’s output. These topics are interpreted through the selection of the top activated words via the weights or reconstructed vector of the decoder that are directly connected to each neuron. In this paper, we present a model-free two-stage process to reinterpret NTM and derive further insights on the state of the trained model. Firstly, building on the original information from a trained NTM, we generate a pool of potential candidate “composite topics” by exploiting possible co-occurrences within the original set of topics, which decouples the strict interpretation of topics from the original NTM. This is followed by a combinatorial formulation to select a final set of composite topics, which we evaluate for coherence and diversity on a large external corpus. Lastly, we employ a user study to derive further insights on the reinterpretation process.

We explore the notion of subjectivity, and hypothesize that word embeddings learnt from input corpora of varying levels of subjectivity behave differently on natural language processing tasks such as classifying a sentence by sentiment, subjectivity, or topic. Through systematic comparative analyses, we establish this to be the case indeed. Moreover, based on the discovery of the outsized role that sentiment words play on subjectivity-sensitive tasks such as sentiment classification, we develop a novel word embedding SentiVec which is infused with sentiment information from a lexical resource, and is shown to outperform baselines on such tasks.