Leveraging Expert Guided Adversarial Augmentation For Improving Generalization in Named Entity Recognition
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Named Entity Recognition (NER) systems often demonstrate great performance on in-distribution data, but perform poorly on examples drawn from a shifted distribution. One way to evaluate the generalization ability of NER models is to use adversarial examples, on which the specific variations associated with named entities are rarely considered. To this end, we propose leveraging expert-guided heuristics to change the entity tokens and their surrounding contexts thereby altering their entity types as adversarial attacks. Using expert-guided heuristics, we augmented the CoNLL 2003 test set and manually annotated it to construct a high-quality challenging set. We found that state-of-the-art NER systems trained on CoNLL 2003 training data drop performance dramatically on our challenging set. By training on adversarial augmented training examples and using mixup for regularization, we were able to significantly improve the performance on the challenging set as well as improve out-of-domain generalization which we evaluated by using OntoNotes data. We have publicly released our dataset and code at https://github.com/GT-SALT/Guided-Adversarial-Augmentation.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Mar 2022.
Builds on
22 of 34 references.
References · 22
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
- 2017mixup: Beyond Empirical Risk Minimizationcited by 5,155
- 2014Neural Machine Translation by Jointly Learning to Align and Translatecited by 4,530
- 2019Is BERT Really Robust? A Strong Baseline for Natural Language Attack on Text Classification and Entailmentcited by 663
- 2018Annotation Artifacts in Natural Language Inference Datacited by 656
- 2017Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systemscited by 568
- 2019Learning the Difference that Makes a Difference with Counterfactually-Augmented Datacited by 428
- 2019PAWS: Paraphrase Adversaries from Word Scramblingcited by 395
- 2017Synthetic and Natural Noise Both Break Neural Machine Translationcited by 304
- 2018Hypothesis Only Baselines in Natural Language Inferencecited by 291
- 2021Adversarial GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark for Robustness Evaluation of Language Modelscited by 227
10 more
- 2018Breaking NLI Systems with Sentences that Require Simple Lexical Inferencescited by 134
- 2020An Empirical Study on Robustness to Spurious Correlations using Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 133
- 2019Adversarial Training Can Hurt Generalizationcited by 131
- 2021An Empirical Survey of Data Augmentation for Limited Data Learning in NLPcited by 101
- 2021AugMax: Adversarial Composition of Random Augmentations for Robust Trainingcited by 89
- 2018How Much Reading Does Reading Comprehension Require? A Critical Investigation of Popular Benchmarkscited by 86
- 2020Adversarial Vertex Mixup: Toward Better Adversarially Robust Generalizationcited by 73
- 2020Rethinking Generalization of Neural Models: A Named Entity Recognition Case Studycited by 35
- 2020Local Additivity Based Data Augmentation for Semi-supervised NERcited by 31
- 2019Named Entity Recognition -- Is there a glass ceiling?cited by 10
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 1.
3 papers.