SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Piek Vossen

Publications and source records attributed to Piek Vossen.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

ROBE: Reversed-Order-Biased-Experts for Extracting Extreme Long-tail Events from Historical Texts

This paper proposes methods to extract over 50 types of events from a Dutch historical corpus spanning the 17th and 18th centuries. The methods we propose aim to tackle the impossible: extracting the long-tail of the long-tail. Historic data from before the 19th century is in itself a niche domain not covered in the pre-training of Large Language Models, and we aim to extract events only very scarcely annotated in the training data available for this domain. We propose creating expert classifiers for subgroups of the events present in the training data. We make these groupings based on similar frequency in the training data or on semantic relatedness. Experts trained on underrepresented events are assigned higher priority when predicting to avoid being dominated by frequency biases. We refer to this new way of combining classifiers, specifically tailored to protect the long-tail, as ROBE: Reversed-Order-Biased-Experts. We also propose a controlled method to create domain-specific synthetic data. Our two implementations of ROBE outperform a simple fine-tuned encoder model with a .10 increase in recall and a .16 increase in precision respectively. The best model achieves a .10 increase in f1 for a group of long-tail classes in our niche data set.

cs.CL

ToxiREX: A Dataset on Toxic REasoning in ConteXt

We introduce a new, contextual, multilingual dataset called ToxiREX: Toxic REasoning in ConteXt. The dataset consists of threads of Reddit comments and structured characterizations of what the comments imply, following a systematic toxic reasoning schema developed in a previous paper. Using the schema allows us to capture and explain implicit and context-dependent toxicity, while supporting mappings to existing toxicity taxonomies. The dataset includes comments in six languages (English, Arabic, Turkish, Spanish, German, and Dutch), collected from posts connected to specific major events (e.g. the 2023 Turkey earthquakes; the Russian invasion of Ukraine). We describe the context-preserving preprocessing of the threads. We create a training set of 125 thousand comments which is annotated by a commercially available LLM, and a test set of just under three thousand comments that is annotated by native speakers. We show that apparent disagreements in the test set annotations often reflect defensible alternative interpretations rather than noise. Finally, we provide baseline results by prompting and fine-tuning language models. To produce these results, we develop evaluation strategies for our hierarchical, schema-based predictions. While models perform better than random, there remains a lot of room for improvement, showing the task to be challenging. ToxiREX is the first dataset to simultaneously incorporate multiple languages, conversational context, and implicit toxicity, while using the toxic reasoning schema for rich, structured annotations. Dataset available at: https://github.com/cltl/toxirex

cs.CL

Understanding and Analyzing Inappropriately Targeting Language in Online Discourse: A Comparative Annotation Study

This paper introduces a method for detecting inappropriately targeting language in online conversations by integrating crowd and expert annotations with ChatGPT. We focus on English conversation threads from Reddit, examining comments that target individuals or groups. Our approach involves a comprehensive annotation framework that labels a diverse data set for various target categories and specific target words within the conversational context. We perform a comparative analysis of annotations from human experts, crowd annotators, and ChatGPT, revealing strengths and limitations of each method in recognizing both explicit hate speech and subtler discriminatory language. Our findings highlight the significant role of contextual factors in identifying hate speech and uncover new categories of targeting, such as social belief and body image. We also address the challenges and subjective judgments involved in annotation and the limitations of ChatGPT in grasping nuanced language. This study provides insights for improving automated content moderation strategies to enhance online safety and inclusivity.

cs.CL

Extracting triples from dialogues for conversational social agents

Obtaining an explicit understanding of communication within a Hybrid Intelligence collaboration is essential to create controllable and transparent agents. In this paper, we describe a number of Natural Language Understanding models that extract explicit symbolic triples from social conversation. Triple extraction has mostly been developed and tested for Knowledge Base Completion using Wikipedia text and data for training and testing. However, social conversation is very different as a genre in which interlocutors exchange information in sequences of utterances that involve statements, questions, and answers. Phenomena such as co-reference, ellipsis, coordination, and implicit and explicit negation or confirmation are more prominent in conversation than in Wikipedia text. We therefore describe an attempt to fill this gap by releasing data sets for training and testing triple extraction from social conversation. We also created five triple extraction models and tested them in our evaluation data. The highest precision is 51.14 for complete triples and 69.32 for triple elements when tested on single utterances. However, scores for conversational triples that span multiple turns are much lower, showing that extracting knowledge from true conversational data is much more challenging.

cs.CL

A Hybrid Intelligence Method for Argument Mining

Large-scale survey tools enable the collection of citizen feedback in opinion corpora. Extracting the key arguments from a large and noisy set of opinions helps in understanding the opinions quickly and accurately. Fully automated methods can extract arguments but (1) require large labeled datasets that induce large annotation costs and (2) work well for known viewpoints, but not for novel points of view. We propose HyEnA, a hybrid (human + AI) method for extracting arguments from opinionated texts, combining the speed of automated processing with the understanding and reasoning capabilities of humans. We evaluate HyEnA on three citizen feedback corpora. We find that, on the one hand, HyEnA achieves higher coverage and precision than a state-of-the-art automated method when compared to a common set of diverse opinions, justifying the need for human insight. On the other hand, HyEnA requires less human effort and does not compromise quality compared to (fully manual) expert analysis, demonstrating the benefit of combining human and artificial intelligence.

cs.AI

Knowledge acquisition for dialogue agents using reinforcement learning on graph representations

We develop an artificial agent motivated to augment its knowledge base beyond its initial training. The agent actively participates in dialogues with other agents, strategically acquiring new information. The agent models its knowledge as an RDF knowledge graph, integrating new beliefs acquired through conversation. Responses in dialogue are generated by identifying graph patterns around these new integrated beliefs. We show that policies can be learned using reinforcement learning to select effective graph patterns during an interaction, without relying on explicit user feedback. Within this context, our study is a proof of concept for leveraging users as effective sources of information.

cs.AI

Grounding Toxicity in Real-World Events across Languages

Social media conversations frequently suffer from toxicity, creating significant issues for users, moderators, and entire communities. Events in the real world, like elections or conflicts, can initiate and escalate toxic behavior online. Our study investigates how real-world events influence the origin and spread of toxicity in online discussions across various languages and regions. We gathered Reddit data comprising 4.5 million comments from 31 thousand posts in six different languages (Dutch, English, German, Arabic, Turkish and Spanish). We target fifteen major social and political world events that occurred between 2020 and 2023. We observe significant variations in toxicity, negative sentiment, and emotion expressions across different events and language communities, showing that toxicity is a complex phenomenon in which many different factors interact and still need to be investigated. We will release the data for further research along with our code.

cs.CL

Unknown Script: Impact of Script on Cross-Lingual Transfer

Cross-lingual transfer has become an effective way of transferring knowledge between languages. In this paper, we explore an often overlooked aspect in this domain: the influence of the source language of a language model on language transfer performance. We consider a case where the target language and its script are not part of the pre-trained model. We conduct a series of experiments on monolingual and multilingual models that are pre-trained on different tokenization methods to determine factors that affect cross-lingual transfer to a new language with a unique script. Our findings reveal the importance of the tokenizer as a stronger factor than the shared script, language similarity, and model size.

cs.CL

The Constant in HATE: Analyzing Toxicity in Reddit across Topics and Languages

Toxic language remains an ongoing challenge on social media platforms, presenting significant issues for users and communities. This paper provides a cross-topic and cross-lingual analysis of toxicity in Reddit conversations. We collect 1.5 million comment threads from 481 communities in six languages: English, German, Spanish, Turkish,Arabic, and Dutch, covering 80 topics such as Culture, Politics, and News. We thoroughly analyze how toxicity spikes within different communities in relation to specific topics. We observe consistent patterns of increased toxicity across languages for certain topics, while also noting significant variations within specific language communities.

cs.CL

Truth-value judgment in language models: 'truth directions' are context sensitive

Recent work has demonstrated that the latent spaces of large language models (LLMs) contain directions predictive of the truth of sentences. Multiple methods recover such directions and build probes that are described as uncovering a model's "knowledge" or "beliefs". We investigate this phenomenon, looking closely at the impact of context on the probes. Our experiments establish where in the LLM the probe's predictions are (most) sensitive to the presence of related sentences, and how to best characterize this kind of sensitivity. We do so by measuring different types of consistency errors that occur after probing an LLM whose inputs consist of hypotheses preceded by (negated) supporting and contradicting sentences. We also perform a causal intervention experiment, investigating whether moving the representation of a premise along these truth-value directions influences the position of an entailed or contradicted sentence along that same direction. We find that the probes we test are generally context sensitive, but that contexts which should not affect the truth often still impact the probe outputs. Our experiments show that the type of errors depend on the layer, the model, and the kind of data. Finally, our results suggest that truth-value directions are causal mediators in the inference process that incorporates in-context information.

cs.CL

An Empirical Analysis of Diversity in Argument Summarization

Presenting high-level arguments is a crucial task for fostering participation in online societal discussions. Current argument summarization approaches miss an important facet of this task -- capturing diversity -- which is important for accommodating multiple perspectives. We introduce three aspects of diversity: those of opinions, annotators, and sources. We evaluate approaches to a popular argument summarization task called Key Point Analysis, which shows how these approaches struggle to (1) represent arguments shared by few people, (2) deal with data from various sources, and (3) align with subjectivity in human-provided annotations. We find that both general-purpose LLMs and dedicated KPA models exhibit this behavior, but have complementary strengths. Further, we observe that diversification of training data may ameliorate generalization. Addressing diversity in argument summarization requires a mix of strategies to deal with subjectivity.

cs.CL

Do Differences in Values Influence Disagreements in Online Discussions?

Disagreements are common in online discussions. Disagreement may foster collaboration and improve the quality of a discussion under some conditions. Although there exist methods for recognizing disagreement, a deeper understanding of factors that influence disagreement is lacking in the literature. We investigate a hypothesis that differences in personal values are indicative of disagreement in online discussions. We show how state-of-the-art models can be used for estimating values in online discussions and how the estimated values can be aggregated into value profiles. We evaluate the estimated value profiles based on human-annotated agreement labels. We find that the dissimilarity of value profiles correlates with disagreement in specific cases. We also find that including value information in agreement prediction improves performance.

cs.CL

Reasoning about Ambiguous Definite Descriptions

Natural language reasoning plays an increasingly important role in improving language models' ability to solve complex language understanding tasks. An interesting use case for reasoning is the resolution of context-dependent ambiguity. But no resources exist to evaluate how well Large Language Models can use explicit reasoning to resolve ambiguity in language. We propose to use ambiguous definite descriptions for this purpose and create and publish the first benchmark dataset consisting of such phrases. Our method includes all information required to resolve the ambiguity in the prompt, which means a model does not require anything but reasoning to do well. We find this to be a challenging task for recent LLMs. Code and data available at: https://github.com/sfschouten/exploiting-ambiguity

cs.CL

Cross-Domain Toxic Spans Detection

Given the dynamic nature of toxic language use, automated methods for detecting toxic spans are likely to encounter distributional shift. To explore this phenomenon, we evaluate three approaches for detecting toxic spans under cross-domain conditions: lexicon-based, rationale extraction, and fine-tuned language models. Our findings indicate that a simple method using off-the-shelf lexicons performs best in the cross-domain setup. The cross-domain error analysis suggests that (1) rationale extraction methods are prone to false negatives, while (2) language models, despite performing best for the in-domain case, recall fewer explicitly toxic words than lexicons and are prone to certain types of false positives. Our code is publicly available at: https://github.com/sfschouten/toxic-cross-domain.

cs.CL

A Machine with Short-Term, Episodic, and Semantic Memory Systems

Inspired by the cognitive science theory of the explicit human memory systems, we have modeled an agent with short-term, episodic, and semantic memory systems, each of which is modeled with a knowledge graph. To evaluate this system and analyze the behavior of this agent, we designed and released our own reinforcement learning agent environment, "the Room", where an agent has to learn how to encode, store, and retrieve memories to maximize its return by answering questions. We show that our deep Q-learning based agent successfully learns whether a short-term memory should be forgotten, or rather be stored in the episodic or semantic memory systems. Our experiments indicate that an agent with human-like memory systems can outperform an agent without this memory structure in the environment.

cs.AI

Evaluating Agent Interactions Through Episodic Knowledge Graphs

We present a new method based on episodic Knowledge Graphs (eKGs) for evaluating (multimodal) conversational agents in open domains. This graph is generated by interpreting raw signals during conversation and is able to capture the accumulation of knowledge over time. We apply structural and semantic analysis of the resulting graphs and translate the properties into qualitative measures. We compare these measures with existing automatic and manual evaluation metrics commonly used for conversational agents. Our results show that our Knowledge-Graph-based evaluation provides more qualitative insights into interaction and the agent's behavior.

cs.AI

A modular architecture for creating multimodal agents

The paper describes a flexible and modular platform to create multimodal interactive agents. The platform operates through an event-bus on which signals and interpretations are posted in a sequence in time. Different sensors and interpretation components can be integrated by defining their input and output as topics, which results in a logical workflow for further interpretations. We explain a broad range of components that have been developed so far and integrated into a range of interactive agents. We also explain how the actual interaction is recorded as multimodal data as well as in a so-called episodic Knowledge Graph. By analysing the recorded interaction, we can analyse and compare different agents and agent components.

cs.AI

A Machine With Human-Like Memory Systems

Inspired by the cognitive science theory, we explicitly model an agent with both semantic and episodic memory systems, and show that it is better than having just one of the two memory systems. In order to show this, we have designed and released our own challenging environment, "the Room", compatible with OpenAI Gym, where an agent has to properly learn how to encode, store, and retrieve memories to maximize its rewards. The Room environment allows for a hybrid intelligence setup where machines and humans can collaborate. We show that two agents collaborating with each other results in better performance than one agent acting alone.

cs.AI