mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Paired Examples as Indirect Supervision in Latent Decision Models

arXiv 2104.01759 ↗First posted 5 Apr 2021cs.CLcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Compositional, structured models are appealing because they explicitly decompose problems and provide interpretable intermediate outputs that give confidence that the model is not simply latching onto data artifacts. Learning these models is challenging, however, because end-task supervision only provides a weak indirect signal on what values the latent decisions should take. This often results in the model failing to learn to perform the intermediate tasks correctly. In this work, we introduce a way to leverage paired examples that provide stronger cues for learning latent decisions. When two related training examples share internal substructure, we add an additional training objective to encourage consistency between their latent decisions. Such an objective does not require external supervision for the values of the latent output, or even the end task, yet provides an additional training signal to that provided by individual training examples themselves. We apply our method to improve compositional question answering using neural module networks on the DROP dataset. We explore three ways to acquire paired questions in DROP: (a) discovering naturally occurring paired examples within the dataset, (b) constructing paired examples using templates, and (c) generating paired examples using a question generation model. We empirically demonstrate that our proposed approach improves both in- and out-of-distribution generalization and leads to correct latent decision predictions.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 35 of its 50 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Apr 2021.

Builds on

35 of 50 references.

References · 35

  1. 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,874
  2. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
  3. 2014Neural Machine Translation by Jointly Learning to Align and Translatecited by 4,530
  4. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
  5. 2019Unsupervised Data Augmentation for Consistency Trainingcited by 1,057
  6. 2019DROP: A Reading Comprehension Benchmark Requiring Discrete Reasoning Over Paragraphscited by 883
  7. 2018Annotation Artifacts in Natural Language Inference Datacited by 656
  8. 2020Asking and Answering Questions to Evaluate the Factual Consistency of Summariescited by 376
  9. 2015Neural Module Networkscited by 375
  10. 2018AllenNLP: A Deep Semantic Natural Language Processing Platformcited by 347
  11. 2019Don't Take the Easy Way Out: Ensemble Based Methods for Avoiding Known Dataset Biasescited by 279
  12. 2017Learning to Ask: Neural Question Generation for Reading Comprehensioncited by 186
23 more
  1. 2020Adversarial Filters of Dataset Biasescited by 159
  2. 2019Good-Enough Compositional Data Augmentationcited by 158
  3. 2018Improving Text-to-SQL Evaluation Methodologycited by 133
  4. 2020Break It Down: A Question Understanding Benchmarkcited by 131
  5. 2016Recurrent Neural Network Grammarscited by 109
  6. 2020Contrastive Learning for Weakly Supervised Phrase Groundingcited by 102
  7. 2019Compositional generalization through meta sequence-to-sequence learningcited by 98
  8. 2019Compositional Questions Do Not Necessitate Multi-hop Reasoningcited by 87
  9. 2020Logic-Guided Data Augmentation and Regularization for Consistent Question Answeringcited by 77
  10. 2020Span-based Semantic Parsing for Compositional Generalizationcited by 77
  11. 2019Barack's Wife Hillary: Using Knowledge-Graphs for Fact-Aware Language Modelingcited by 71
  12. 2020Learning What Makes a Difference from Counterfactual Examples and Gradient Supervisioncited by 66
  13. 2019Neural Module Networks for Reasoning over Textcited by 65
  14. 2019A Logic-Driven Framework for Consistency of Neural Modelscited by 64
  15. 2019CLOSURE: Assessing Systematic Generalization of CLEVR Modelscited by 63
  16. 2018Adversarially Regularising Neural NLI Models to Integrate Logical Background Knowledgecited by 45
  17. 2020Improving Compositional Generalization in Semantic Parsingcited by 42
  18. 2019A Multi-Type Multi-Span Network for Reading Comprehension that Requires Discrete Reasoningcited by 41
  19. 2020Obtaining Faithful Interpretations from Compositional Neural Networkscited by 23
  20. 2019Generating Question-Answer Hierarchiescited by 20
  21. 2017Dynamic Entity Representations in Neural Language Modelscited by 19
  22. 2019Transcoding compositionally: using attention to find more generalizable solutionscited by 14
  23. 2019On Incorporating Semantic Prior Knowledge in Deep Learning Through Embedding-Space Constraintscited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 1; 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.

6 papers.