Text Characterization Toolkit
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In NLP, models are usually evaluated by reporting single-number performance scores on a number of readily available benchmarks, without much deeper analysis. Here, we argue that - especially given the well-known fact that benchmarks often contain biases, artefacts, and spurious correlations - deeper results analysis should become the de-facto standard when presenting new models or benchmarks. We present a tool that researchers can use to study properties of the dataset and the influence of those properties on their models' behaviour. Our Text Characterization Toolkit includes both an easy-to-use annotation tool, as well as off-the-shelf scripts that can be used for specific analyses. We also present use-cases from three different domains: we use the tool to predict what are difficult examples for given well-known trained models and identify (potentially harmful) biases and heuristics that are present in a dataset.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Oct 2022.
Builds on
26 of 36 references.
References · 26
- 2022PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathwayscited by 5,304
- 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,854
- 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,018
- 2022OPT: Open Pre-trained Transformer Language Modelscited by 3,464
- 2017A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inferencecited by 2,665
- 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,157
- 2015A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inferencecited by 1,837
- 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,371
- 2022No Language Left Behind: Scaling Human-Centered Machine Translationcited by 1,290
- 2019Right for the Wrong Reasons: Diagnosing Syntactic Heuristics in Natural Language Inferencecited by 864
- 2018Gender Bias in Coreference Resolution: Evaluation and Debiasing Methodscited by 657
- 2017Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systemscited by 568
14 more
- 2021Dynabench: Rethinking Benchmarking in NLPcited by 447
- 2018Gender Bias in Coreference Resolutioncited by 438
- 2018SWAG: A Large-Scale Adversarial Dataset for Grounded Commonsense Inferencecited by 333
- 2018Hypothesis Only Baselines in Natural Language Inferencecited by 291
- 2017End-to-end Neural Coreference Resolutioncited by 240
- 2016Demographic Dialectal Variation in Social Media: A Case Study of African-American Englishcited by 194
- 2020How Can We Accelerate Progress Towards Human-like Linguistic Generalization?cited by 114
- 2021Competency Problems: On Finding and Removing Artifacts in Language Datacited by 91
- 2016A Thorough Examination of the CNN/Daily Mail Reading Comprehension Taskcited by 71
- 2018Performance Impact Caused by Hidden Bias of Training Data for Recognizing Textual Entailmentcited by 58
- 2021ExplainaBoard: An Explainable Leaderboard for NLPcited by 50
- 2019Don't Take the Premise for Granted: Mitigating Artifacts in Natural Language Inferencecited by 48
- 2018Evolutionary Data Measures: Understanding the Difficulty of Text Classification Taskscited by 11
- 2022What Makes Reading Comprehension Questions Difficult?cited by 11
Built on by
Not cited yet.