NLP in the age of monolithic large language models is approaching its limits in terms of size and information that can be handled. The trend goes to modularization, a necessary step into the direction of designing smaller sub-networks and components with specialized functionality. In this paper, we present the MAMMOTH toolkit: a framework designed for training massively multilingual modular machine translation systems at scale, initially derived from OpenNMT-py and then adapted to ensure efficient training across computation clusters.We showcase its efficiency across clusters of A100 and V100 NVIDIA GPUs, and discuss our design philosophy and plans for future information.The toolkit is publicly available online at https://github.com/Helsinki-NLP/mammoth.

Emergent language games are experimental protocols designed to model how communication may arise among a group of agents. In this paper, we focus on how to improve performances of neural agents playing a signaling game: a sender is exposed to an image and generates a sequence of symbols that is transmitted to a receiver, which uses it to distinguish between two images, one that is semantically related to the original image, and one that is not. We consider multiple design choices, such as pretraining the visual components of the agents, introducing regularization terms, how to sample training items from the dataset, and we study how these different choices impact the behavior and performances of the agents. To that end, we introduce a number of automated metrics to measure the properties of the emergent language. We find that some implementation choices are always beneficial, and that the information that is conveyed by the agents’ messages is shaped not only by the game, but also by the overall design of the agents as well as seemingly unrelated implementation choices.

Grounding has been argued to be a crucial component towards the development of more complete and truly semantically competent artificial intelligence systems. Literature has divided into two camps: While some argue that grounding allows for qualitatively different generalizations, others believe it can be compensated by mono-modal data quantity. Limited empirical evidence has emerged for or against either position, which we argue is due to the methodological challenges that come with studying grounding and its effects on NLP systems. In this paper, we establish a methodological framework for studying what the effects are—if any—of providing models with richer input sources than text-only. The crux of it lies in the construction of comparable samples of populations of models trained on different input modalities, so that we can tease apart the qualitative effects of different input sources from quantifiable model performances. Experiments using this framework reveal qualitative differences in model behavior between cross-modally grounded, cross-lingually grounded, and ungrounded models, which we measure both at a global dataset level as well as for specific word representations, depending on how concrete their semantics is.

A recent body of work has demonstrated that Transformer embeddings can be linearly decomposed into well-defined sums of factors, that can in turn be related to specific network inputs or components. There is however still a dearth of work studying whether these mathematical reformulations are empirically meaningful. In the present work, we study representations from machine-translation decoders using two of such embedding decomposition methods. Our results indicate that, while decomposition-derived indicators effectively correlate with model performance, variation across different runs suggests a more nuanced take on this question. The high variability of our measurements indicate that geometry reflects model-specific characteristics more than it does sentence-specific computations, and that similar training conditions do not guarantee similar vector spaces.

How does the word analogy task fit in the modern NLP landscape? Given the rarity of comparable multilingual benchmarks and the lack of a consensual evaluation protocol for contextual models, this remains an open question. In this paper, we introduce MATS: a multilingual analogy dataset, covering forty analogical relations in six languages, and evaluate human as well as static and contextual embedding performances on the task. We find that not all analogical relations are equally straightforward for humans, static models remain competitive with contextual embeddings, and optimal settings vary across languages and analogical relations. Several key challenges remain, including creating benchmarks that align with human reasoning and understanding what drives differences across methodologies.

There are several ways of implementing multilingual NLP systems but little consensus as to whether different approaches exhibit similar effects. Are the trends that we observe when adding more languages the same as those we observe when sharing more parameters? We focus on encoder representations drawn from modular multilingual machine translation systems in an English-centric scenario, and study their quality from multiple aspects: how adequate they are for machine translation, how independent of the source language they are, and what semantic information they convey. Adding translation directions in English-centric scenarios does not conclusively lead to an increase in translation quality. Shared layers increase performance on zero-shot translation pairs and lead to more language-independent representations, but these improvements do not systematically align with more semantically accurate representations, from a monolingual standpoint.

Definition Modeling, the task of generating definitions, was first proposed as a means to evaluate the semantic quality of word embeddings—a coherent lexical semantic representations of a word in context should contain all the information necessary to generate its definition. The relative novelty of this task entails that we do not know which factors are actually relied upon by a Definition Modeling system. In this paper, we present evidence that the task may not involve as much semantics as one might expect: we show how an earlier model from the literature is both rather insensitive to semantic aspects such as explicit polysemy, as well as reliant on formal similarities between headwords and words occurring in its glosses, casting doubt on the validity of the task as a means to evaluate embeddings.

Pretrained embeddings based on the Transformer architecture have taken the NLP community by storm. We show that they can mathematically be reframed as a sum of vector factors and showcase how to use this reframing to study the impact of each component. We provide evidence that multi-head attentions and feed-forwards are not equally useful in all downstream applications, as well as a quantitative overview of the effects of finetuning on the overall embedding space. This approach allows us to draw connections to a wide range of previous studies, from vector space anisotropy to attention weights.

Word embeddings have advanced the state of the art in NLP across numerous tasks. Understanding the contents of dense neural representations is of utmost interest to the computational semantics community. We propose to focus on relating these opaque word vectors with human-readable definitions, as found in dictionaries This problem naturally divides into two subtasks: converting definitions into embeddings, and converting embeddings into definitions. This task was conducted in a multilingual setting, using comparable sets of embeddings trained homogeneously.

La génération de définitions est une tâche récente qui vise à produire des définitions lexicographiques à partir de plongements lexicaux. Nous remarquons deux lacunes : (i) l’état de l’art actuel ne s’est penché que sur l’anglais et le chinois, et (ii) l’utilisation escomptée en tant que méthode d’évaluation des plongements lexicaux doit encore être vérifiée. Pour y remédier, nous proposons un jeu de données pour la génération de définitions en français, ainsi qu’une évaluation des performances d’un modèle de génération de définitions simple selon les plongements lexicaux fournis en entrée.

Compositionality is a widely discussed property of natural languages, although its exact definition has been elusive. We focus on the proposal that compositionality can be assessed by measuring meaning-form correlation. We analyze meaning-form correlation on three sets of languages: (i) artificial toy languages tailored to be compositional, (ii) a set of English dictionary definitions, and (iii) a set of English sentences drawn from literature. We find that linguistic phenomena such as synonymy and ungrounded stop-words weigh on MFC measurements, and that straightforward methods to mitigate their effects have widely varying results depending on the dataset they are applied to. Data and code are made publicly available.

Defining words in a textual context is a useful task both for practical purposes and for gaining insight into distributed word representations. Building on the distributional hypothesis, we argue here that the most natural formalization of definition modeling is to treat it as a sequence-to-sequence task, rather than a word-to-sequence task: given an input sequence with a highlighted word, generate a contextually appropriate definition for it. We implement this approach in a Transformer-based sequence-to-sequence model. Our proposal allows to train contextualization and definition generation in an end-to-end fashion, which is a conceptual improvement over earlier works. We achieve state-of-the-art results both in contextual and non-contextual definition modeling.