Kevin Scaria


2024

pdf bib
InstructABSA: Instruction Learning for Aspect Based Sentiment Analysis
Kevin Scaria | Himanshu Gupta | Siddharth Goyal | Saurabh Sawant | Swaroop Mishra | Chitta Baral
Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 2: Short Papers)

We introduce InstructABSA, an instruction learning paradigm for Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis (ABSA) subtasks.Our method introduces positive, negative, and neutral examples to each training sample, and instruction tune the model (Tk-Instruct) for ABSA subtasks, yielding significant performance improvements. Experimental results on the Sem Eval 2014, 15, and 16 datasets demonstrate that InstructABSA outperforms the previous state-of-the-art (SOTA) approaches on Term Extraction (ATE), Sentiment Classification(ATSC) and Sentiment Pair Extraction (ASPE) subtasks.In particular, InstructABSA outperforms the previous state-of-the-art (SOTA) on the Rest14 ATE subtask by 5.69% points, the Rest15 ATSC subtask by 9.59% points, and the Lapt14 AOPE subtask by 3.37% points, surpassing 7x larger models.We get competitive results on AOOE, AOPE, AOSTE, and ACOSQE subtasks indicating strong generalization ability to all subtasks. Exploring sample efficiency reveals that just 50% train data is required to get competitive results with other instruction tuning approaches. Lastly, we assess the quality of instructions and observe that InstructABSA’s performance experiences a decline of ~10% when adding misleading examples

2023

pdf bib
“John is 50 years old, can his son be 65?” Evaluating NLP Models’ Understanding of Feasibility
Himanshu Gupta | Neeraj Varshney | Swaroop Mishra | Kuntal Kumar Pal | Saurabh Arjun Sawant | Kevin Scaria | Siddharth Goyal | Chitta Baral
Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

In current NLP research, large-scale language models and their abilities are widely being discussed. Some recent works have also found notable failures of these models. Often these failure examples involve complex reasoning abilities. This work focuses on a simple commonsense ability, reasoning about when an action (or its effect) is feasible. To this end, we introduce FeasibilityQA, a question-answering dataset involving binary classification (BCQ) and multi-choice multi-correct questions (MCQ) that test understanding of feasibility. We show that even state-of-the-art models such as GPT-3, GPT-2, and T5 struggle to answer the feasibility questions correctly. Specifically, on (MCQ, BCQ) questions, GPT-3 achieves accuracy of just (19%, 62%) and (25%, 64%) in zero-shot and few-shot settings, respectively. We also evaluate models by providing relevant knowledge statements required to answer the question and find that the additional knowledge leads to a 7% gain in performance, but the overall performance still remains low. These results make one wonder how much commonsense knowledge about action feasibility is encoded in state-of-the-art models and how well they can reason about it.