Knowledge editing techniques (KEs) can update language models' obsolete or inaccurate knowledge learned from pre-training. However, KE also faces potential malicious applications, e.g. inserting misinformation and toxic content. Moreover, in the context of responsible AI, it is instructive for end-users to know whether a generated output is driven by edited knowledge or first-hand knowledge from pre-training. To this end, we study detecting edited knowledge in language models by introducing a novel task: given an edited model and a specific piece of knowledge the model generates, our objective is to classify the knowledge as either "non-edited" (based on the pre-training), or ``edited'' (based on subsequent editing). We initiate the task with two state-of-the-art KEs, two language models, and two datasets. We further propose a simple classifier, RepReg, a logistic regression model that takes hidden state representations as input features. Our results reveal that RepReg establishes a strong baseline, achieving a peak accuracy of 99.81%, and 97.79% in out-of-domain settings. Second, RepReg achieves near-optimal performance with a limited training set (200 training samples), and it maintains its performance even in out-of-domain settings. Last, we find it more challenging to separate edited and non-edited knowledge when they contain the same subject or object.
Surgery to treat elderly hip fracture patients may cause complications that can lead to early mortality. An early warning system for complications could provoke clinicians to monitor high-risk patients more carefully and address potential complications early, or inform the patient. In this work, we develop a multimodal deep-learning model for post-operative mortality prediction using pre-operative and per-operative data from elderly hip fracture patients. Specifically, we include static patient data, hip and chest images before surgery in pre-operative data, vital signals, and medications administered during surgery in per-operative data. We extract features from image modalities using ResNet and from vital signals using LSTM. Explainable model outcomes are essential for clinical applicability, therefore we compute Shapley values to explain the predictions of our multimodal black box model. We find that i) Shapley values can be used to estimate the relative contribution of each modality both locally and globally, and ii) a modified version of the chain rule can be used to propagate Shapley values through a sequence of models supporting interpretable local explanations. Our findings imply that a multimodal combination of black box models can be explained by propagating Shapley values through the model sequence.
As NLP models become more complex, understanding their decisions becomes more crucial. Counterfactuals (CFs), where minimal changes to inputs flip a model's prediction, offer a way to explain these models. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable performance in NLP tasks, their efficacy in generating high-quality CFs remains uncertain. This work fills this gap by investigating how well LLMs generate CFs for two NLU tasks. We conduct a comprehensive comparison of several common LLMs, and evaluate their CFs, assessing both intrinsic metrics, and the impact of these CFs on data augmentation. Moreover, we analyze differences between human and LLM-generated CFs, providing insights for future research directions. Our results show that LLMs generate fluent CFs, but struggle to keep the induced changes minimal. Generating CFs for Sentiment Analysis (SA) is less challenging than NLI where LLMs show weaknesses in generating CFs that flip the original label. This also reflects on the data augmentation performance, where we observe a large gap between augmenting with human and LLMs CFs. Furthermore, we evaluate LLMs' ability to assess CFs in a mislabelled data setting, and show that they have a strong bias towards agreeing with the provided labels. GPT4 is more robust against this bias and its scores correlate well with automatic metrics. Our findings reveal several limitations and point to potential future work directions.
Counterfactual text generation aims to minimally change a text, such that it is classified differently. Judging advancements in method development for counterfactual text generation is hindered by a non-uniform usage of data sets and metrics in related work. We propose CEval, a benchmark for comparing counterfactual text generation methods. CEval unifies counterfactual and text quality metrics, includes common counterfactual datasets with human annotations, standard baselines (MICE, GDBA, CREST) and the open-source language model LLAMA-2. Our experiments found no perfect method for generating counterfactual text. Methods that excel at counterfactual metrics often produce lower-quality text while LLMs with simple prompts generate high-quality text but struggle with counterfactual criteria. By making CEval available as an open-source Python library, we encourage the community to contribute more methods and maintain consistent evaluation in future work.
Recent advances in natural language processing (NLP) can be largely attributed to the advent of pre-trained language models such as BERT and RoBERTa. While these models demonstrate remarkable performance on general datasets, they can struggle in specialized domains such as medicine, where unique domain-specific terminologies, domain-specific abbreviations, and varying document structures are common. This paper explores strategies for adapting these models to domain-specific requirements, primarily through continuous pre-training on domain-specific data. We pre-trained several German medical language models on 2.4B tokens derived from translated public English medical data and 3B tokens of German clinical data. The resulting models were evaluated on various German downstream tasks, including named entity recognition (NER), multi-label classification, and extractive question answering. Our results suggest that models augmented by clinical and translation-based pre-training typically outperform general domain models in medical contexts. We conclude that continuous pre-training has demonstrated the ability to match or even exceed the performance of clinical models trained from scratch. Furthermore, pre-training on clinical data or leveraging translated texts have proven to be reliable methods for domain adaptation in medical NLP tasks.
Deep learning models have achieved high performance in medical applications, however, their adoption in clinical practice is hindered due to their black-box nature. Self-explainable models, like prototype-based models, can be especially beneficial as they are interpretable by design. However, if the learnt prototypes are of low quality then the prototype-based models are as good as black-box. Having high quality prototypes is a pre-requisite for a truly interpretable model. In this work, we propose a prototype evaluation framework for coherence (PEF-C) for quantitatively evaluating the quality of the prototypes based on domain knowledge. We show the use of PEF-C in the context of breast cancer prediction using mammography. Existing works on prototype-based models on breast cancer prediction using mammography have focused on improving the classification performance of prototype-based models compared to black-box models and have evaluated prototype quality through anecdotal evidence. We are the first to go beyond anecdotal evidence and evaluate the quality of the mammography prototypes systematically using our PEF-C. Specifically, we apply three state-of-the-art prototype-based models, ProtoPNet, BRAIxProtoPNet++ and PIP-Net on mammography images for breast cancer prediction and evaluate these models w.r.t. i) classification performance, and ii) quality of the prototypes, on three public datasets. Our results show that prototype-based models are competitive with black-box models in terms of classification performance, and achieve a higher score in detecting ROIs. However, the quality of the prototypes are not yet sufficient and can be improved in aspects of relevance, purity and learning a variety of prototypes. We call the XAI community to systematically evaluate the quality of the prototypes to check their true usability in high stake decisions and improve such models further.
Information from neuroimaging examinations (CT, MRI) is increasingly used to support diagnoses of dementia, e.g., Alzheimer's disease. While current clinical practice is mainly based on visual inspection and feature engineering, Deep Learning approaches can be used to automate the analysis and to discover new image-biomarkers. Part-prototype neural networks (PP-NN) are an alternative to standard blackbox models, and have shown promising results in general computer vision. PP-NN's base their reasoning on prototypical image regions that are learned fully unsupervised, and combined with a simple-to-understand decision layer. We present PIPNet3D, a PP-NN for volumetric images. We apply PIPNet3D to the clinical case study of Alzheimer's Disease diagnosis from structural Magnetic Resonance Imaging (sMRI). We assess the quality of prototypes under a systematic evaluation framework, propose new metrics to evaluate brain prototypes and perform an evaluation with domain experts. Our results show that PIPNet3D is an interpretable, compact model for Alzheimer's diagnosis with its reasoning well aligned to medical domain knowledge. Notably, PIPNet3D achieves the same accuracy as its blackbox counterpart; and removing the remaining clinically irrelevant prototypes from its decision process does not decrease predictive performance.
We present a detailed replication study of the BASS framework, an abstractive summarization system based on the notion of Unified Semantic Graphs. Our investigation includes challenges in replicating key components and an ablation study to systematically isolate error sources rooted in replicating novel components. Our findings reveal discrepancies in performance compared to the original work. We highlight the significance of paying careful attention even to reasonably omitted details for replicating advanced frameworks like BASS, and emphasize key practices for writing replicable papers.
Factual knowledge encoded in Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs) enriches their representations and justifies their use as knowledge bases. Previous work has focused on probing PLMs for factual knowledge by measuring how often they can correctly predict an object entity given a subject and a relation, and improving fact retrieval by optimizing the prompts used for querying PLMs. In this work, we consider a complementary aspect, namely the coherency of factual knowledge in PLMs, i.e., how often can PLMs predict the subject entity given its initial prediction of the object entity. This goes beyond evaluating how much PLMs know, and focuses on the internal state of knowledge inside them. Our results indicate that PLMs have low coherency using manually written, optimized and paraphrased prompts, but including an evidence paragraph leads to substantial improvement. This shows that PLMs fail to model inverse relations and need further enhancements to be able to handle retrieving facts from their parameters in a coherent manner, and to be considered as knowledge bases.
Text simplification aims to make technical texts more accessible to laypeople but often results in deletion of information and vagueness. This work proposes InfoLossQA, a framework to characterize and recover simplification-induced information loss in form of question-and-answer (QA) pairs. Building on the theory of Question Under Discussion, the QA pairs are designed to help readers deepen their knowledge of a text. We conduct a range of experiments with this framework. First, we collect a dataset of 1,000 linguist-curated QA pairs derived from 104 LLM simplifications of scientific abstracts of medical studies. Our analyses of this data reveal that information loss occurs frequently, and that the QA pairs give a high-level overview of what information was lost. Second, we devise two methods for this task: end-to-end prompting of open-source and commercial language models, and a natural language inference pipeline. With a novel evaluation framework considering the correctness of QA pairs and their linguistic suitability, our expert evaluation reveals that models struggle to reliably identify information loss and applying similar standards as humans at what constitutes information loss.