As the key to sentiment analysis, sentiment composition considers the classification of a constituent via classifications of its contained sub-constituents and rules operated on them. Such compositionality has been widely studied previously in the form of hierarchical trees including untagged and sentiment ones, which are intrinsically suboptimal in our view. To address this, we propose semantic tree, a new tree form capable of interpreting the sentiment composition in a principled way. Semantic tree is a derivation of a context-free grammar (CFG) describing the specific composition rules on difference semantic roles, which is designed carefully following previous linguistic conclusions. However, semantic tree is a latent variable since there is no its annotation in regular datasets. Thus, in our method, it is marginalized out via inside algorithm and learned to optimize the classification performance. Quantitative and qualitative results demonstrate that our method not only achieves better or competitive results compared to baselines in the setting of regular and domain adaptation classification, and also generates plausible tree explanations.

As one of the most exciting features of large language models (LLMs), in-context learning is a mixed blessing. While it allows users to fast-prototype a task solver with only a few training examples, the performance is generally sensitive to various configurations of the prompt such as the choice or order of the training examples. In this paper, we for the first time theoretically and empirically identify that such a paradox is mainly due to the label shift of the in-context model to the data distribution, in which LLMs shift the label marginal p(y) while having a good label conditional p(x|y). With this understanding, we can simply calibrate the in-context predictive distribution by adjusting the label marginal, which is estimated via Monte-Carlo sampling over the in-context model, i.e., generation of LLMs. We call our approach as generative calibration. We conduct exhaustive experiments with 12 text classification tasks and 12 LLMs scaling from 774M to 33B, generally find that the proposed method greatly and consistently outperforms the ICL as well as state-of-the-art calibration methods, by up to 27% absolute in macro-F1. Meanwhile, the proposed method is also stable under different prompt configurations.

Modern deep learning models are notoriously opaque, which has motivated the development of methods for interpreting how deep models predict. This goal is usually approached with attribution method, which assesses the influence of features on model predictions. As an explanation method, the evaluation criteria of attribution methods is how accurately it reflects the actual reasoning process of the model (faithfulness). Meanwhile, since the reasoning process of deep models is inaccessible, researchers design various evaluation methods to demonstrate their arguments. However, some crucial logic traps in these evaluation methods are ignored in most works, causing inaccurate evaluation and unfair comparison. This paper systematically reviews existing methods for evaluating attribution scores and summarizes the logic traps in these methods. We further conduct experiments to demonstrate the existence of each logic trap. Through both theoretical and experimental analysis, we hope to increase attention on the inaccurate evaluation of attribution scores. Moreover, with this paper, we suggest stopping focusing on improving performance under unreliable evaluation systems and starting efforts on reducing the impact of proposed logic traps.

Deep learning models have achieved great success on the task of Natural Language Inference (NLI), though only a few attempts try to explain their behaviors. Existing explanation methods usually pick prominent features such as words or phrases from the input text. However, for NLI, alignments among words or phrases are more enlightening clues to explain the model. To this end, this paper presents AREC, a post-hoc approach to generate alignment rationale explanations for co-attention based models in NLI. The explanation is based on feature selection, which keeps few but sufficient alignments while maintaining the same prediction of the target model. Experimental results show that our method is more faithful and human-readable compared with many existing approaches. We further study and re-evaluate three typical models through our explanation beyond accuracy, and propose a simple method that greatly improves the model robustness.

Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) have become key components of modern medical care systems. Despite the merits of EMRs, many doctors suffer from writing them, which is time-consuming and tedious. We believe that automatically converting medical dialogues to EMRs can greatly reduce the burdens of doctors, and extracting information from medical dialogues is an essential step. To this end, we annotate online medical consultation dialogues in a window-sliding style, which is much easier than the sequential labeling annotation. We then propose a Medical Information Extractor (MIE) towards medical dialogues. MIE is able to extract mentioned symptoms, surgeries, tests, other information and their corresponding status. To tackle the particular challenges of the task, MIE uses a deep matching architecture, taking dialogue turn-interaction into account. The experimental results demonstrate MIE is a promising solution to extract medical information from doctor-patient dialogues.