State-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs) are accredited with an increasing number of different capabilities, ranging from reading comprehension over advanced mathematical and reasoning skills to possessing scientific knowledge. In this paper we focus on multi-hop reasoning—the ability to identify and integrate information from multiple textual sources.Given the concerns with the presence of simplifying cues in existing multi-hop reasoning benchmarks, which allow models to circumvent the reasoning requirement, we set out to investigate whether LLMs are prone to exploiting such simplifying cues. We find evidence that they indeed circumvent the requirement to perform multi-hop reasoning, but they do so in more subtle ways than what was reported about their fine-tuned pre-trained language model (PLM) predecessors. We propose a challenging multi-hop reasoning benchmark by generating seemingly plausible multi-hop reasoning chains that ultimately lead to incorrect answers. We evaluate multiple open and proprietary state-of-the-art LLMs and show that their multi-hop reasoning performance is affected, as indicated by up to 45% relative decrease in F1 score when presented with such seemingly plausible alternatives. We also find that—while LLMs tend to ignore misleading lexical cues—misleading reasoning paths indeed present a significant challenge. The code and data are made available at https://github.com/zawedcvg/Are-Large-Language-Models-Attentive-Readers

Digital archive collections that have been contributed by communities, known as community-generated digital content (CGDC), are important sources of historical and cultural knowledge. However, CGDC items are not easily searchable due to semantic information being obscured within their textual metadata. In this paper, we investigate the extent to which state-of-the-art, general-domain entity linking (EL) models (i.e., BLINK, EPGEL and mGENRE) can map named entities mentioned in CGDC textual metadata, to Wikidata entities. We evaluate and compare their performance on an annotated dataset of CGDC textual metadata and provide some error analysis, in the way of informing future studies aimed at enriching CGDC metadata using entity linking methods.

With the recent advances of large language models (LLMs), it is no longer infeasible to build an automated debate system that helps people to synthesise persuasive arguments. Previous work attempted this task by integrating multiple components. In our work, we introduce an argument mining dataset that captures the end-to-end process of preparing an argumentative essay for a debate, which covers the tasks of claim and evidence identification (Task 1 ED), evidence convincingness ranking (Task 2 ECR), argumentative essay summarisation and human preference ranking (Task 3 ASR) and metric learning for automated evaluation of resulting essays, based on human feedback along argument quality dimensions (Task 4 SQE). Our dataset contains 14k examples of claims that are fully annotated with various properties supporting the aforementioned tasks. We evaluate multiple generative baselines for each of these tasks, including representative LLMs. We find, that while they show promising results on individual tasks in our benchmark, their end-to-end performance on all four tasks in succession deteriorates significantly, both in automated measures as well as in human-centred evaluation. This challenge presented by our proposed dataset motivates future research on end-to-end argument mining and summarisation. The repository of this project is available at https://github.com/HarrywillDr/ArgSum-Datatset.

There is vivid research on adapting Large Language Models (LLMs) to perform a variety of tasks in high-stakes domains such as healthcare. Despite their popularity, there is a lack of understanding of the extent and contributing factors that allow LLMs to recall relevant knowledge and combine it with presented information in the clinical and biomedical domain: a fundamental pre-requisite for success on down-stream tasks.Addressing this gap, we use Multiple Choice and Abstractive Question Answering to conduct a large-scale empirical study on 22 datasets in three generalist and three specialist biomedical sub-domains. Our multifaceted analysis of the performance of 15 LLMs, further broken down by sub-domain, source of knowledge and model architecture, uncovers success factors such as instruction tuning that lead to improved recall and comprehension. We further show that while recently proposed domain-adapted models may lack adequate knowledge, directly fine-tuning on our collected medical knowledge datasets shows encouraging results, even generalising to unseen specialist sub-domains. We complement the quantitative results with a skill-oriented manual error analysis, which reveals a significant gap between the models’ capabilities to simply recall necessary knowledge and to integrate it with the presented context.To foster research and collaboration in this field we share M-QALM, our resources, standardised methodology, and evaluation results, with the research community to facilitate further advancements in clinical knowledge representation learning within language models.

Sentence representations are a critical component in NLP applications such as retrieval, question answering, and text classification. They capture the meaning of a sentence, enabling machines to understand and reason over human language. In recent years, significant progress has been made in developing methods for learning sentence representations, including unsupervised, supervised, and transfer learning approaches. However there is no literature review on sentence representations till now. In this paper, we provide an overview of the different methods for sentence representation learning, focusing mostly on deep learning models. We provide a systematic organization of the literature, highlighting the key contributions and challenges in this area. Overall, our review highlights the importance of this area in natural language processing, the progress made in sentence representation learning, and the challenges that remain. We conclude with directions for future research, suggesting potential avenues for improving the quality and efficiency of sentence representations.

The importance of rationales, or natural language explanations, lies in their capacity to bridge the gap between machine predictions and human understanding, by providing human-readable insights into why a text classifier makes specific decisions. This paper presents a novel multi-task rationalisation approach tailored to enhancing the explainability of multi-label text classifiers to identify indicators of forced labour. Our framework integrates a rationale extraction task with the classification objective and allows the inclusion of human explanations during training. We conduct extensive experiments using transformer-based models on a dataset consisting of 2,800 news articles, each annotated with labels and human-generated explanations. Our findings reveal a statistically significant difference between the best-performing architecture leveraging human rationales during training and variants using only labels. Specifically, the supervised model demonstrates a 10% improvement in predictive performance measured by the weighted F1 score, a 15% increase in the agreement between human and machine-generated rationales, and a 4% improvement in the generated rationales’ comprehensiveness. These results hold promising implications for addressing complex human rights issues with greater transparency and accountability using advanced NLP techniques.

Argument summarisation is a promising but currently under-explored field. Recent work has aimed to provide textual summaries in the form of concise and salient short texts, i.e., key points (KPs), in a task known as Key Point Analysis (KPA). One of the main challenges in KPA is finding high-quality key point candidates from dozens of arguments even in a small corpus. Furthermore, evaluating key points is crucial in ensuring that the automatically generated summaries are useful. Although automatic methods for evaluating summarisation have considerably advanced over the years, they mainly focus on sentence-level comparison, making it difficult to measure the quality of a summary (a set of KPs) as a whole. Aggravating this problem is the fact that human evaluation is costly and unreproducible. To address the above issues, we propose a two-step abstractive summarisation framework based on neural topic modelling with an iterative clustering procedure, to generate key points which are aligned with how humans identify key points. Our experiments show that our framework advances the state of the art in KPA, with performance improvement of up to 14 (absolute) percentage points, in terms of both ROUGE and our own proposed evaluation metrics. Furthermore, we evaluate the generated summaries using a novel set-based evaluation toolkit. Our quantitative analysis demonstrates the effectiveness of our proposed evaluation metrics in assessing the quality of generated KPs. Human evaluation further demonstrates the advantages of our approach and validates that our proposed evaluation metric is more consistent with human judgment than ROUGE scores.

Medical progress notes play a crucial role in documenting a patient’s hospital journey, including his or her condition, treatment plan, and any updates for healthcare providers. Automatic summarisation of a patient’s problems in the form of a “problem list” can aid stakeholders in understanding a patient’s condition, reducing workload and cognitive bias. BioNLP 2023 Shared Task 1A focusses on generating a list of diagnoses and problems from the provider’s progress notes during hospitalisation. In this paper, we introduce our proposed approach to this task, which integrates two complementary components. One component employs large language models (LLMs) for data augmentation; the other is an abstractive summarisation LLM with a novel pre-training objective for generating the patients’ problems summarised as a list. Our approach was ranked second among all submissions to the shared task. The performance of our model on the development and test datasets shows that our approach is more robust on unknown data, with an improvement of up to 3.1 points over the same size of the larger model.

Clinical notes in healthcare facilities are tagged with the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code; a list of classification codes for medical diagnoses and procedures. ICD coding is a challenging multilabel text classification problem due to noisy clinical document inputs and long-tailed label distribution. Recent automated ICD coding efforts improve performance by encoding medical notes and codes with additional data and knowledge bases. However, most of them do not reflect how human coders generate the code: first, the coders select general code categories and then look for specific subcategories that are relevant to a patient’s condition. Inspired by this, we propose a two-stage decoding mechanism to predict ICD codes. Our model uses the hierarchical properties of the codes to split the prediction into two steps: At first, we predict the parent code and then predict the child code based on the previous prediction. Experiments on the public MIMIC-III data set have shown that our model performs well in single-model settings without external data or knowledge.

Argument mining (AM) is a natural language processing task that aims to generate an argumentative graph given an unstructured argumentative text. An argumentative graph that consists of argumentative components and argumentative relations contains completed information of an argument and exhibits the logic of an argument. As the argument structure of an argumentative text can be regarded as an answer to a “why” question, the whole argument structure is therefore similar to the “chain of thought” concept, i.e., the sequence of ideas that lead to a specific conclusion for a given argument (Wei et al., 2022). For argumentative texts in the same specific genre, the “chain of thought” of such texts is usually similar, i.e., in a student essay, there is usually a major claim supported by several claims, and then a number of premises which are related to the claims are included (Eger et al., 2017). In this paper, we propose a new perspective which transfers the argument mining task into a multi-hop reading comprehension task, allowing the model to learn the argument structure as a “chain of thought”. We perform a comprehensive evaluation of our approach on two AM benchmarks and find that we surpass SOTA results. A detailed analysis shows that specifically the “chain of thought” information is helpful for the argument mining task.

This paper presents our submission to the WMT 2023 Quality Estimation (QE) shared task 1 (sentence-level subtask). We propose a straightforward training data augmentation approach aimed at improving the correlation between QE model predictions and human quality assessments. Utilising eleven data augmentation approaches and six distinct language pairs, we systematically create augmented training sets by individually applying each method to the original training set of each respective language pair. By evaluating the performance gap between the model before and after training on the augmented dataset, as measured on the development set, we assess the effectiveness of each augmentation method. Experimental results reveal that synonym replacement via the Paraphrase Database (PPDB) yields the most substantial performance boost for language pairs English-German, English-Marathi and English-Gujarati, while for the remaining language pairs, methods such as contextual word embeddings-based words insertion, back translation, and direct paraphrasing prove to be more effective. Training the model on a more diverse and larger set of samples does confer further performance improvements for certain language pairs, albeit to a marginal extent, and this phenomenon is not universally applicable. At the time of submission, we select the model trained on the augmented dataset constructed using the respective most effective method to generate predictions for the test set in each language pair, except for the English-German. Despite not being highly competitive, our system consistently surpasses the baseline performance on most language pairs and secures a third-place ranking in the English-Marathi.

Biomedical argument mining (BAM) aims at automatically identifying the argumentative structure in biomedical texts. However, identifying and classifying argumentative relations (AR) between argumentative components (AC) is challenging since it not only needs to understand the semantics of ACs but also need to capture the interactions between them. We argue that entities can serve as bridges that connect different ACs since entities and their mentions convey significant semantic information in biomedical argumentation. For example, it is common that related AC pairs share a common entity. Capturing such entity information can be beneficial for the Relation Identification (RI) task. In order to incorporate this entity information into BAM, we propose an Entity Coreference and Co-occurrence aware Argument Mining (ECCAM) framework based on an edge-oriented graph model for BAM. We evaluate our model on a benchmark dataset and from the experimental results we find that our method improves upon state-of-the-art methods.

Signed Language Processing (SLP) concerns the automated processing of signed languages, the main means of communication of Deaf and hearing impaired individuals. SLP features many different tasks, ranging from sign recognition to translation and production of signed speech, but has been overlooked by the NLP community thus far. In this paper, we bring to attention the task of modelling the phonology of sign languages. We leverage existing resources to construct a large-scale dataset of American Sign Language signs annotated with six different phonological properties. We then conduct an extensive empirical study to investigate whether data-driven end-to-end and feature-based approaches can be optimised to automatically recognise these properties. We find that, despite the inherent challenges of the task, graph-based neural networks that operate over skeleton features extracted from raw videos are able to succeed at the task to a varying degree. Most importantly, we show that this performance pertains even on signs unobserved during training.

State-of-the-art deep-learning-based approaches to Natural Language Processing (NLP) are credited with various capabilities that involve reasoning with natural language texts. %However, reasoning in this setting is often ill-defined and shallow. In this paper we carry out a large-scale empirical study investigating the detection of formally valid inferences in controlled fragments of natural language for which the satisfiability problem becomes increasingly complex. We find that, while transformer-based language models perform surprisingly well in these scenarios, a deeper analysis reveals that they appear to overfit to superficial patterns in the data rather than acquiring the logical principles governing the reasoning in these fragments.

Natural language processing (NLP) has been shown to perform well in various tasks, such as answering questions, ascertaining natural language inference and anomaly detection. However, there are few NLP-related studies that touch upon the moral context conveyed in text. This paper studies whether state-of-the-art, pre-trained language models are capable of passing moral judgments on posts retrieved from a popular Reddit user board. Reddit is a social discussion website and forum where posts are promoted by users through a voting system. In this work, we construct a dataset that can be used for moral judgement tasks by collecting data from the AITA? (Am I the A*******?) subreddit. To model our task, we harnessed the power of pre-trained language models, including BERT, RoBERTa, RoBERTa-large, ALBERT and Longformer. We then fine-tuned these models and evaluated their ability to predict the correct verdict as judged by users for each post in the datasets. RoBERTa showed relative improvements across the three datasets, exhibiting a rate of 87% accuracy and a Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) of 0.76, while the use of the Longformer model slightly improved the performance when used with longer sequences, achieving 87% accuracy and 0.77 MCC.

Forced labour is the most common type of modern slavery, and it is increasingly gaining the attention of the research and social community. Recent studies suggest that artificial intelligence (AI) holds immense potential for augmenting anti-slavery action. However, AI tools need to be developed transparently in cooperation with different stakeholders. Such tools are contingent on the availability and access to domain-specific data, which are scarce due to the near-invisible nature of forced labour. To the best of our knowledge, this paper presents the first openly accessible English corpus annotated for multi-class and multi-label forced labour detection. The corpus consists of 989 news articles retrieved from specialised data sources and annotated according to risk indicators defined by the International Labour Organization (ILO). Each news article was annotated for two aspects: (1) indicators of forced labour as classification labels and (2) snippets of the text that justify labelling decisions. We hope that our data set can help promote research on explainability for multi-class and multi-label text classification. In this work, we explain our process for collecting the data underpinning the proposed corpus, describe our annotation guidelines and present some statistical analysis of its content. Finally, we summarise the results of baseline experiments based on different variants of the Bidirectional Encoder Representation from Transformer (BERT) model.

The goal of text zoning is to segment a text into zones (i.e., Background, Conclusion) that serve distinct functions. Argumentative zoning, a specific text zoning scheme for the scientific domain, is considered as the antecedent for argument mining by many researchers. Surprisingly, however, little work is concerned with exploiting zoning information to improve the performance of argument mining models, despite the relatedness of the two tasks. In this paper, we propose two transformer-based models to incorporate zoning information into argumentative component identification and classification tasks. One model is for the sentence-level argument mining task and the other is for the token-level task. In particular, we add the zoning labels predicted by an off-the-shelf model to the beginning of each sentence, inspired by the convention commonly used biomedical abstracts. Moreover, we employ multi-head attention to transfer the sentence-level zoning information to each token in a sentence. Based on experiment results, we find a significant improvement in F1-scores for both sentence- and token-level tasks. It is worth mentioning that these zoning labels can be obtained with high accuracy by utilising readily available automated methods. Thus, existing argument mining models can be improved by incorporating zoning information without any additional annotation cost.

An in-depth analysis of the level of language understanding required by existing Machine Reading Comprehension (MRC) benchmarks can provide insight into the reading capabilities of machines. In this paper, we propose an ablation-based methodology to assess the extent to which MRC datasets evaluate the understanding of explicit discourse relations. We define seven MRC skills which require the understanding of different discourse relations. We then introduce ablation methods that verify whether these skills are required to succeed on a dataset. By observing the drop in performance of neural MRC models evaluated on the original and the modified dataset, we can measure to what degree the dataset requires these skills, in order to be understood correctly. Experiments on three large-scale datasets with the BERT-base and ALBERT-xxlarge model show that the relative changes for all skills are small (less than 6%). These results imply that most of the answered questions in the examined datasets do not require understanding the discourse structure of the text. To specifically probe for natural language understanding, there is a need to design more challenging benchmarks that can correctly evaluate the intended skills.

Machine Reading Comprehension (MRC) is the task of answering a question over a paragraph of text. While neural MRC systems gain popularity and achieve noticeable performance, issues are being raised with the methodology used to establish their performance, particularly concerning the data design of gold standards that are used to evaluate them. There is but a limited understanding of the challenges present in this data, which makes it hard to draw comparisons and formulate reliable hypotheses. As a first step towards alleviating the problem, this paper proposes a unifying framework to systematically investigate the present linguistic features, required reasoning and background knowledge and factual correctness on one hand, and the presence of lexical cues as a lower bound for the requirement of understanding on the other hand. We propose a qualitative annotation schema for the first and a set of approximative metrics for the latter. In a first application of the framework, we analyse modern MRC gold standards and present our findings: the absence of features that contribute towards lexical ambiguity, the varying factual correctness of the expected answers and the presence of lexical cues, all of which potentially lower the reading comprehension complexity and quality of the evaluation data.

Recent advances in reading comprehension have resulted in models that surpass human performance when the answer is contained in a single, continuous passage of text. However, complex Question Answering (QA) typically requires multi-hop reasoning - i.e. the integration of supporting facts from different sources, to infer the correct answer. This paper proposes Document Graph Network (DGN), a message passing architecture for the identification of supporting facts over a graph-structured representation of text. The evaluation on HotpotQA shows that DGN obtains competitive results when compared to a reading comprehension baseline operating on raw text, confirming the relevance of structured representations for supporting multi-hop reasoning.

This paper describes DBee, a database to support the construction of data-intensive AI applications. DBee provides a unique data model which operates jointly over large-scale knowledge graphs (KGs) and embedding vector spaces (VSs). This model supports queries which exploit the semantic properties of both types of representations (KGs and VSs). Additionally, DBee aims to facilitate the construction of KGs and VSs, by providing a library of generators, which can be used to create, integrate and transform data into KGs and VSs.