Deep learning methods have enabled taskoriented semantic parsing of increasingly complex utterances. However, a single model is still typically trained and deployed for each task separately, requiring labeled training data for each, which makes it challenging to support new tasks, even within a single business vertical (e.g., food-ordering or travel booking). In this paper we describe Cross-TOP (Cross-Schema Task-Oriented Parsing), a zero-shot method for complex semantic parsing in a given vertical. By leveraging the fact that user requests from the same vertical share lexical and semantic similarities, a single cross-schema parser is trained to service an arbitrary number of tasks, seen or unseen, within a vertical. We show that Cross-TOP can achieve high accuracy on a previously unseen task without requiring any additional training data, thereby providing a scalable way to bootstrap semantic parsers for new tasks. As part of this work we release the FoodOrdering dataset, a task-oriented parsing dataset in the food-ordering vertical, with utterances and annotations derived from five schemas, each from a different restaurant menu.

We investigate how well BERT performs on predicting factuality in several existing English datasets, encompassing various linguistic constructions. Although BERT obtains a strong performance on most datasets, it does so by exploiting common surface patterns that correlate with certain factuality labels, and it fails on instances where pragmatic reasoning is necessary. Contrary to what the high performance suggests, we are still far from having a robust system for factuality prediction.

The dominant paradigm for semantic parsing in recent years is to formulate parsing as a sequence-to-sequence task, generating predictions with auto-regressive sequence decoders. In this work, we explore an alternative paradigm. We formulate semantic parsing as a dependency parsing task, applying graph-based decoding techniques developed for syntactic parsing. We compare various decoding techniques given the same pre-trained Transformer encoder on the TOP dataset, including settings where training data is limited or contains only partially-annotated examples. We find that our graph-based approach is competitive with sequence decoders on the standard setting, and offers significant improvements in data efficiency and settings where partially-annotated data is available.

When a speaker, Mary, asks “Do you know that Florence is packed with visitors?”, we take her to believe that Florence is packed with visitors, but not if she asks “Do you think that Florence is packed with visitors?”. Inferring speaker commitment (aka event factuality) is crucial for information extraction and question answering. Here, we explore the hypothesis that linguistic deficits drive the error patterns of existing speaker commitment models by analyzing the linguistic correlates of model error on a challenging naturalistic dataset. We evaluate two state-of-the-art speaker commitment models on the CommitmentBank, an English dataset of naturally occurring discourses. The CommitmentBank is annotated with speaker commitment towards the content of the complement (“Florence is packed with visitors” in our example) of clause-embedding verbs (“know”, “think”) under four entailment-canceling environments (negation, modal, question, conditional). A breakdown of items by linguistic features reveals asymmetrical error patterns: while the models achieve good performance on some classes (e.g., negation), they fail to generalize to the diverse linguistic constructions (e.g., conditionals) in natural language, highlighting directions for improvement.

Natural language inference (NLI) datasets (e.g., MultiNLI) were collected by soliciting hypotheses for a given premise from annotators. Such data collection led to annotation artifacts: systems can identify the premise-hypothesis relationship without observing the premise (e.g., negation in hypothesis being indicative of contradiction). We address this problem by recasting the CommitmentBank for NLI, which contains items involving reasoning over the extent to which a speaker is committed to complements of clause-embedding verbs under entailment-canceling environments (conditional, negation, modal and question). Instead of being constructed to stand in certain relationships with the premise, hypotheses in the recast CommitmentBank are the complements of the clause-embedding verb in each premise, leading to no annotation artifacts in the hypothesis. A state-of-the-art BERT-based model performs well on the CommitmentBank with 85% F1. However analysis of model behavior shows that the BERT models still do not capture the full complexity of pragmatic reasoning, nor encode some of the linguistic generalizations, highlighting room for improvement.

This paper describes the OSU submission to the SIGMORPHON 2019 shared task, Crosslinguality and Context in Morphology. Our system addresses the contextual morphological analysis subtask of Task 2, which is to produce the morphosyntactic description (MSD) of each fully inflected word within a given sentence. We frame this as a sequence generation task and employ a neural encoder-decoder (seq2seq) architecture to generate the sequence of MSD tags given the encoded representation of each token. Follow-up analyses reveal that our system most significantly improves performance on morphologically complex languages whose inflected word forms typically have longer MSD tag sequences. In addition, our system seems to capture the structured correlation between MSD tags, such as that between the “verb” tag and TAM-related tags.

This paper describes our system submission to the 2018 Fact Extraction and VERification (FEVER) shared task. The system uses a heuristics-based approach for evidence extraction and a modified version of the inference model by Parikh et al. (2016) for classification. Our process is broken down into three modules: potentially relevant documents are gathered based on key phrases in the claim, then any possible evidence sentences inside those documents are extracted, and finally our classifier discards any evidence deemed irrelevant and uses the remaining to classify the claim’s veracity. Our system beats the shared task baseline by 12% and is successful at finding correct evidence (evidence retrieval F1 of 62.5% on the development set).