This paper investigates the relationship between graph convolution and Mixup techniques. Graph convolution in a graph neural network involves aggregating features from neighboring samples to learn representative features for a specific node or sample. On the other hand, Mixup is a data augmentation technique that generates new examples by averaging features and one-hot labels from multiple samples. One commonality between these techniques is their utilization of information from multiple samples to derive feature representation. This study aims to explore whether a connection exists between these two approaches. Our investigation reveals that, under two mild conditions, graph convolution can be viewed as a specialized form of Mixup that is applied during both the training and testing phases. The two conditions are: 1) \textit{Homophily Relabel} - assigning the target node's label to all its neighbors, and 2) \textit{Test-Time Mixup} - Mixup the feature during the test time. We establish this equivalence mathematically by demonstrating that graph convolution networks (GCN) and simplified graph convolution (SGC) can be expressed as a form of Mixup. We also empirically verify the equivalence by training an MLP using the two conditions to achieve comparable performance.
Among the remarkable emergent capabilities of large language models (LMs) is free-text rationalization; beyond a certain scale, large LMs are capable of generating seemingly useful rationalizations, which in turn, can dramatically enhance their performances on leaderboards. This phenomenon raises a question: can machine generated rationales also be useful for humans, especially when lay humans try to answer questions based on those machine rationales? We observe that human utility of existing rationales is far from satisfactory, and expensive to estimate with human studies. Existing metrics like task performance of the LM generating the rationales, or similarity between generated and gold rationales are not good indicators of their human utility. While we observe that certain properties of rationales like conciseness and novelty are correlated with their human utility, estimating them without human involvement is challenging. We show that, by estimating a rationale's helpfulness in answering similar unseen instances, we can measure its human utility to a better extent. We also translate this finding into an automated score, GEN-U, that we propose, which can help improve LMs' ability to generate rationales with better human utility, while maintaining most of its task performance. Lastly, we release all code and collected data with this project.
Fine-tuning large pre-trained language models on downstream tasks is apt to suffer from overfitting when limited training data is available. While dropout proves to be an effective antidote by randomly dropping a proportion of units, existing research has not examined its effect on the self-attention mechanism. In this paper, we investigate this problem through self-attention attribution and find that dropping attention positions with low attribution scores can accelerate training and increase the risk of overfitting. Motivated by this observation, we propose Attribution-Driven Dropout (AD-DROP), which randomly discards some high-attribution positions to encourage the model to make predictions by relying more on low-attribution positions to reduce overfitting. We also develop a cross-tuning strategy to alternate fine-tuning and AD-DROP to avoid dropping high-attribution positions excessively. Extensive experiments on various benchmarks show that AD-DROP yields consistent improvements over baselines. Analysis further confirms that AD-DROP serves as a strategic regularizer to prevent overfitting during fine-tuning.
Free-text rationales aim to explain neural language model (LM) behavior more flexibly and intuitively via natural language. To ensure rationale quality, it is important to have metrics for measuring rationales' faithfulness (reflects LM's actual behavior) and plausibility (convincing to humans). All existing free-text rationale metrics are based on simulatability (association between rationale and LM's predicted label), but there is no protocol for assessing such metrics' reliability. To investigate this, we propose FRAME, a framework for evaluating free-text rationale simulatability metrics. FRAME is based on three axioms: (1) good metrics should yield highest scores for reference rationales, which maximize rationale-label association by construction; (2) good metrics should be appropriately sensitive to semantic perturbation of rationales; and (3) good metrics should be robust to variation in the LM's task performance. Across three text classification datasets, we show that existing simulatability metrics cannot satisfy all three FRAME axioms, since they are implemented via model pretraining which muddles the metric's signal. We introduce a non-pretraining simulatability variant that improves performance on (1) and (3) by an average of 41.7% and 42.9%, respectively, while performing competitively on (2).
Neural language models' (NLMs') reasoning processes are notoriously hard to explain. Recently, there has been much progress in automatically generating machine rationales of NLM behavior, but less in utilizing the rationales to improve NLM behavior. For the latter, explanation regularization (ER) aims to improve NLM generalization by pushing the machine rationales to align with human rationales. Whereas prior works primarily evaluate such ER models via in-distribution (ID) generalization, ER's impact on out-of-distribution (OOD) is largely underexplored. Plus, little is understood about how ER model performance is affected by the choice of ER criteria or by the number/choice of training instances with human rationales. In light of this, we propose ER-TEST, a protocol for evaluating ER models' OOD generalization along three dimensions: (1) unseen datasets, (2) contrast set tests, and (3) functional tests. Using ER-TEST, we study three key questions: (A) Which ER criteria are most effective for the given OOD setting? (B) How is ER affected by the number/choice of training instances with human rationales? (C) Is ER effective with distantly supervised human rationales? ER-TEST enables comprehensive analysis of these questions by considering a diverse range of tasks and datasets. Through ER-TEST, we show that ER has little impact on ID performance, but can yield large gains on OOD performance w.r.t. (1)-(3). Also, we find that the best ER criterion is task-dependent, while ER can improve OOD performance even with limited and distantly-supervised human rationales.
We propose an autoregressive entity linking model, that is trained with two auxiliary tasks, and learns to re-rank generated samples at inference time. Our proposed novelties address two weaknesses in the literature. First, a recent method proposes to learn mention detection and then entity candidate selection, but relies on predefined sets of candidates. We use encoder-decoder autoregressive entity linking in order to bypass this need, and propose to train mention detection as an auxiliary task instead. Second, previous work suggests that re-ranking could help correct prediction errors. We add a new, auxiliary task, match prediction, to learn re-ranking. Without the use of a knowledge base or candidate sets, our model sets a new state of the art in two benchmark datasets of entity linking: COMETA in the biomedical domain, and AIDA-CoNLL in the news domain. We show through ablation studies that each of the two auxiliary tasks increases performance, and that re-ranking is an important factor to the increase. Finally, our low-resource experimental results suggest that performance on the main task benefits from the knowledge learned by the auxiliary tasks, and not just from the additional training data.
While neural networks have shown remarkable success on classification tasks in terms of average-case performance, they often fail to perform well on certain groups of the data. Such group information may be expensive to obtain; thus, recent works in robustness and fairness have proposed ways to improve worst-group performance even when group labels are unavailable for the training data. However, these methods generally underperform methods that utilize group information at training time. In this work, we assume access to a small number of group labels alongside a larger dataset without group labels. We propose BARACK, a simple two-step framework to utilize this partial group information to improve worst-group performance: train a model to predict the missing group labels for the training data, and then use these predicted group labels in a robust optimization objective. Theoretically, we provide generalization bounds for our approach in terms of the worst-group performance, showing how the generalization error scales with respect to both the total number of training points and the number of training points with group labels. Empirically, our method outperforms the baselines that do not use group information, even when only 1-33% of points have group labels. We provide ablation studies to support the robustness and extensibility of our framework.
An extractive rationale explains a language model's (LM's) prediction on a given task instance by highlighting the text inputs that most influenced the output. Ideally, rationale extraction should be faithful (reflects LM's behavior), plausible (makes sense to humans), data-efficient, and fast, without sacrificing the LM's task performance. Prior rationale extraction works consist of specialized approaches for addressing various subsets of these desiderata -- but never all five. Narrowly focusing on certain desiderata typically comes at the expense of ignored ones, so existing rationale extractors are often impractical in real-world applications. To tackle this challenge, we propose UniREx, a unified and highly flexible learning framework for rationale extraction, which allows users to easily account for all five factors. UniREx enables end-to-end customization of the rationale extractor training process, supporting arbitrary: (1) heuristic/learned rationale extractors, (2) combinations of faithfulness and/or plausibility objectives, and (3) amounts of gold rationale supervision. Across three text classification datasets, our best UniREx configurations achieve a superior balance of the five desiderata, when compared to strong baselines. Furthermore, UniREx-trained rationale extractors can even generalize to unseen datasets and tasks.
Large neural networks are impractical to deploy on mobile devices due to their heavy computational cost and slow inference. Knowledge distillation (KD) is a technique to reduce the model size while retaining performance by transferring knowledge from a large "teacher" model to a smaller "student" model. However, KD on multimodal datasets such as vision-language datasets is relatively unexplored and digesting such multimodal information is challenging since different modalities present different types of information. In this paper, we propose modality-specific distillation (MSD) to effectively transfer knowledge from a teacher on multimodal datasets. Existing KD approaches can be applied to multimodal setup, but a student doesn't have access to modality-specific predictions. Our idea aims at mimicking a teacher's modality-specific predictions by introducing an auxiliary loss term for each modality. Because each modality has different importance for predictions, we also propose weighting approaches for the auxiliary losses; a meta-learning approach to learn the optimal weights on these loss terms. In our experiments, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our MSD and the weighting scheme and show that it achieves better performance than KD.
We present a deep learning approach for high resolution face completion with multiple controllable attributes (e.g., male and smiling) under arbitrary masks. Face completion entails understanding both structural meaningfulness and appearance consistency locally and globally to fill in "holes" whose content do not appear elsewhere in an input image. It is a challenging task with the difficulty level increasing significantly with respect to high resolution, the complexity of "holes" and the controllable attributes of filled-in fragments. Our system addresses the challenges by learning a fully end-to-end framework that trains generative adversarial networks (GANs) progressively from low resolution to high resolution with conditional vectors encoding controllable attributes. We design novel network architectures to exploit information across multiple scales effectively and efficiently. We introduce new loss functions encouraging sharp completion. We show that our system can complete faces with large structural and appearance variations using a single feed-forward pass of computation with mean inference time of 0.007 seconds for images at 1024 x 1024 resolution. We also perform a pilot human study that shows our approach outperforms state-of-the-art face completion methods in terms of rank analysis. The code will be released upon publication.