Recent language models enable new opportunities for structured reasoning with text, such as the construction of intuitive, proof-like textual entailment trees without relying on brittle formal logic. However, progress in this direction has been hampered by a long-standing lack of a clear protocol for determining what _valid decompositional entailment_ is. This absence causes noisy datasets and limited performance gains by modern neuro-symbolic entailment engines. To address these problems, we formulate a consistent and theoretically grounded approach to annotating decompositional entailment and evaluate its impact on LLM-based textual inference. We find that our new dataset, RDTE (Recognizing Decompositional Textual Entailment), has a substantially higher internal consistency than prior decompositional entailment datasets, suggesting that RDTE is a significant step forward in the long-standing problem of forming a clear protocol for discerning entailment. We also find that training an RDTE-oriented entailment classifier via knowledge distillation and employing it in an entailment tree reasoning engine significantly improves both accuracy and proof quality, illustrating the practical benefit of this advance for textual inference.

Computational linguistics models commonly target the prediction of discrete—categorical—labels. When assessing how well-calibrated these model predictions are, popular evaluation schemes require practitioners to manually determine a binning scheme: grouping labels into bins to approximate true label posterior. The problem is that these metrics are sensitive to binning decisions. We consider two solutions to the binning problem that apply at the stage of data annotation: collecting either distributed (redundant) labels or direct scalar value assignment. In this paper, we show that although both approaches address the binning problem by evaluating instance-level calibration, direct scalar assignment is significantly more cost-effective. We provide theoretical analysis and empirical evidence to support our proposal for dataset creators to adopt scalar annotation protocols to enable a higher-quality assessment of model calibration.

As generated text becomes more commonplace, it is increasingly important to evaluate how well-supported such text is by external knowledge sources. Many approaches for evaluating textual support rely on some method for decomposing text into its individual subclaims which are scored against a trusted reference. We investigate how various methods of claim decomposition—especially LLM-based methods—affect the result of an evaluation approach such as the recently proposed FActScore, finding that it is sensitive to the decomposition method used. This sensitivity arises because such metrics attribute overall textual support to the model that generated the text even though error can also come from the metric’s decomposition step. To measure decomposition quality, we introduce an adaptation of FActScore, which we call DecompScore. We then propose an LLM-based approach to generating decompositions inspired by Bertrand Russell’s theory of logical atomism and neo-Davidsonian semantics and demonstrate its improved decomposition quality over previous methods.

Free-text rationales play a pivotal role in explainable NLP, bridging the knowledge and reasoning gaps behind a model’s decision-making. However, due to the diversity of potential reasoning paths and a corresponding lack of definitive ground truth, their evaluation remains a challenge. Existing metrics rely on the degree to which a rationale supports a target label, but we find these fall short in evaluating rationales that inadvertently leak the label. To address this problem, we propose RORA, a RObust free-text RAtionale evaluation against label leakage. RORA quantifies the new information supplied by a rationale to justify the label. This is achieved by assessing the conditional 𝒱-information (Hewitt et al., 2021) with a predictive family robust against leaky features that can be exploited by a small model. RORA consistently outperforms existing approaches in evaluating human-written, synthetic, or model-generated rationales, particularly demonstrating robustness against label leakage. We also show that RORA aligns well with human judgment, providing a more reliable and accurate measurement across diverse free-text rationales.

We investigate model calibration in the setting of zero-shot cross-lingual transfer with large-scale pre-trained language models. The level of model calibration is an important metric for evaluating the trustworthiness of predictive models. There exists an essential need for model calibration when natural language models are deployed in critical tasks. We study different post-training calibration methods in structured and unstructured prediction tasks. We find that models trained with data from the source language become less calibrated when applied to the target language and that calibration errors increase with intrinsic task difficulty and relative sparsity of training data. Moreover, we observe a potential connection between the level of calibration error and an earlier proposed measure of the distance from English to other languages. Finally, our comparison demonstrates that among other methods Temperature Scaling (TS) generalizes well to distant languages, but TS fails to calibrate more complex confidence estimation in structured predictions compared to more expressive alternatives like Gaussian Process Calibration.

Typical ASR systems segment the input audio into utterances using purely acoustic information, which may not resemble the sentence-like units that are expected by conventional machine translation (MT) systems for Spoken Language Translation. In this work, we propose a model for correcting the acoustic segmentation of ASR models for low-resource languages to improve performance on downstream tasks. We propose the use of subtitles as a proxy dataset for correcting ASR acoustic segmentation, creating synthetic acoustic utterances by modeling common error modes. We train a neural tagging model for correcting ASR acoustic segmentation and show that it improves downstream performance on MT and audio-document cross-language information retrieval (CLIR).

We address the problem of predicting psychiatric hospitalizations using linguistic features drawn from social media posts. We formulate this novel task and develop an approach to automatically extract time spans of self-reported psychiatric hospitalizations. Using this dataset, we build predictive models of psychiatric hospitalization, comparing feature sets, user vs. post classification, and comparing model performance using a varying time window of posts. Our best model achieves an F1 of .718 using 7 days of posts. Our results suggest that this is a useful framework for collecting hospitalization data, and that social media data can be leveraged to predict acute psychiatric crises before they occur, potentially saving lives and improving outcomes for individuals with mental illness.

We address the problem of automatic detection of psychiatric disorders from the linguistic content of social media posts. We build a large scale dataset of Reddit posts from users with eight disorders and a control user group. We extract and analyze linguistic characteristics of posts and identify differences between diagnostic groups. We build strong classification models based on deep contextualized word representations and show that they outperform previously applied statistical models with simple linguistic features by large margins. We compare user-level and post-level classification performance, as well as an ensembled multiclass model.

We introduce Uncertain Natural Language Inference (UNLI), a refinement of Natural Language Inference (NLI) that shifts away from categorical labels, targeting instead the direct prediction of subjective probability assessments. We demonstrate the feasibility of collecting annotations for UNLI by relabeling a portion of the SNLI dataset under a probabilistic scale, where items even with the same categorical label differ in how likely people judge them to be true given a premise. We describe a direct scalar regression modeling approach, and find that existing categorically-labeled NLI data can be used in pre-training. Our best models correlate well with humans, demonstrating models are capable of more subtle inferences than the categorical bin assignment employed in current NLI tasks.

In this work, we focus on improving ASR output segmentation in the context of low-resource language speech-to-text translation. ASR output segmentation is crucial, as ASR systems segment the input audio using purely acoustic information and are not guaranteed to output sentence-like segments. Since most MT systems expect sentences as input, feeding in longer unsegmented passages can lead to sub-optimal performance. We explore the feasibility of using datasets of subtitles from TV shows and movies to train better ASR segmentation models. We further incorporate part-of-speech (POS) tag and dependency label information (derived from the unsegmented ASR outputs) into our segmentation model. We show that this noisy syntactic information can improve model accuracy. We evaluate our models intrinsically on segmentation quality and extrinsically on downstream MT performance, as well as downstream tasks including cross-lingual information retrieval (CLIR) tasks and human relevance assessments. Our model shows improved performance on downstream tasks for Lithuanian and Bulgarian.

In this document we present an end-to-end machine reading comprehension system that solves multiple choice questions with a textual entailment perspective. Since some of the knowledge required is not explicitly mentioned in the text, we try to exploit commonsense knowledge by using pretrained word embeddings during contextual embeddings and by dynamically generating a weighted representation of related script knowledge. In the model two kinds of prediction structure are ensembled, and the final accuracy of our system is 10 percent higher than the naiive baseline.