An Application of Pseudo-Log-Likelihoods to Natural Language Scoring
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Language models built using semi-supervised machine learning on large corpora of natural language have very quickly enveloped the fields of natural language generation and understanding. In this paper we apply a zero-shot approach independently developed by a number of researchers now gaining recognition as a significant alternative to fine-tuning for evaluation on common sense tasks. A language model with relatively few parameters and training steps compared to a more recent language model (T5) can outperform it on a recent large data set (TimeDial), while displaying robustness in its performance across a similar class of language tasks. Surprisingly, this result is achieved by using a hyperparameter-free zero-shot method with the smaller model, compared to fine-tuning to the larger model. We argue that robustness of the smaller model ought to be understood in terms of compositionality, in a sense that we draw from recent literature on a class of similar models. We identify a practical cost for our method and model: high GPU-time for natural language evaluation. The zero-shot measurement technique that produces remarkable stability, both for ALBERT and other BERT variants, is an application of pseudo-log-likelihoods to masked language models for the relative measurement of probability for substitution alternatives in forced choice language tasks such as the Winograd Schema Challenge, Winogrande, and others. One contribution of this paper is to bring together a number of similar, but independent strands of research. We produce some absolute state-of-the-art results for common sense reasoning in binary choice tasks, performing better than any published result in the literature, including fine-tuned efforts. We show a remarkable consistency of the model's performance under adversarial settings, which we argue is best explained by the model's compositionality of representations.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Jan 2022.
Builds on
18 of 36 references.
References · 18
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2013Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Spacecited by 4,346
- 2013Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionalitycited by 3,462
- 2019ALBERT: A Lite BERT for Self-supervised Learning of Language Representationscited by 2,772
- 2018Deep contextualized word representationscited by 2,285
- 2019SuperGLUE: A Stickier Benchmark for General-Purpose Language Understanding Systemscited by 1,718
- 2019BERT Rediscovers the Classical NLP Pipelinecited by 1,046
- 2019What Does BERT Look At? An Analysis of BERT's Attentioncited by 994
- 2016Assessing the Ability of LSTMs to Learn Syntax-Sensitive Dependenciescited by 350
- 2021PonderNet: Learning to Pondercited by 156
- 2019Evaluating Commonsense in Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 95
6 more
- 2021Making Transformers Solve Compositional Taskscited by 72
- 2019Linguistic generalization and compositionality in modern artificial neural networkscited by 58
- 2021TIMEDIAL: Temporal Commonsense Reasoning in Dialogcited by 55
- 2020The Sensitivity of Language Models and Humans to Winograd Schema Perturbationscited by 21
- 2021Can Transformer Models Measure Coherence In Text? Re-Thinking the Shuffle Testcited by 17
- 2021Compositional Processing Emerges in Neural Networks Solving Math Problemscited by 11
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1.
1 paper.
- 2023Salient Span Masking for Temporal Understandingcited by 14
- 2023Salient Span Masking for Temporal Understanding22 Mar 2023