mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

LINGO : Visually Debiasing Natural Language Instructions to Support Task Diversity

arXiv 2304.06184 ↗First posted 12 Apr 2023cs.HC cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Cross-task generalization is a significant outcome that defines mastery in natural language understanding. Humans show a remarkable aptitude for this, and can solve many different types of tasks, given definitions in the form of textual instructions and a small set of examples. Recent work with pre-trained language models mimics this learning style: users can define and exemplify a task for the model to attempt as a series of natural language prompts or instructions. While prompting approaches have led to higher cross-task generalization compared to traditional supervised learning, analyzing 'bias' in the task instructions given to the model is a difficult problem, and has thus been relatively unexplored. For instance, are we truly modeling a task, or are we modeling a user's instructions? To help investigate this, we develop LINGO, a novel visual analytics interface that supports an effective, task-driven workflow to (1) help identify bias in natural language task instructions, (2) alter (or create) task instructions to reduce bias, and (3) evaluate pre-trained model performance on debiased task instructions. To robustly evaluate LINGO, we conduct a user study with both novice and expert instruction creators, over a dataset of 1,616 linguistic tasks and their natural language instructions, spanning 55 different languages. For both user groups, LINGO promotes the creation of more difficult tasks for pre-trained models, that contain higher linguistic diversity and lower instruction bias. We additionally discuss how the insights learned in developing and evaluating LINGO can aid in the design of future dashboards that aim to minimize the effort involved in prompt creation across multiple domains.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 39 of its 64 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Apr 2023.

Builds on

39 of 64 references.

References · 39

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  2. 2022PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathwayscited by 5,326
  3. 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,780
  4. 2018Deep contextualized word representationscited by 2,290
  5. 2021Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Methods in Natural Language Processingcited by 2,234
  6. 2017Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)cited by 1,319
  7. 2019DROP: A Reading Comprehension Benchmark Requiring Discrete Reasoning Over Paragraphscited by 903
  8. 2019Adversarial NLI: A New Benchmark for Natural Language Understandingcited by 807
  9. 2019ALFRED: A Benchmark for Interpreting Grounded Instructions for Everyday Taskscited by 783
  10. 2021Cross-Task Generalization via Natural Language Crowdsourcing Instructionscited by 699
  11. 2018Annotation Artifacts in Natural Language Inference Datacited by 671
  12. 2021Prompt Programming for Large Language Models: Beyond the Few-Shot Paradigmcited by 606
27 more
  1. 2020UnifiedQA: Crossing Format Boundaries With a Single QA Systemcited by 476
  2. 2021Dynabench: Rethinking Benchmarking in NLPcited by 459
  3. 2019Learning the Difference that Makes a Difference with Counterfactually-Augmented Datacited by 439
  4. 2019Meta-Dataset: A Dataset of Datasets for Learning to Learn from Few Examplescited by 315
  5. 2018Hypothesis Only Baselines in Natural Language Inferencecited by 295
  6. 2022PromptSource: An Integrated Development Environment and Repository for Natural Language Promptscited by 289
  7. 2021Muppet: Massive Multi-task Representations with Pre-Finetuningcited by 192
  8. 2019Are We Modeling the Task or the Annotator? An Investigation of Annotator Bias in Natural Language Understanding Datasetscited by 175
  9. 2020Adversarial Filters of Dataset Biasescited by 160
  10. 2019REPAIR: Removing Representation Bias by Dataset Resamplingcited by 157
  11. 2022CommonsenseQA 2.0: Exposing the Limits of AI through Gamificationcited by 109
  12. 2019FairVis: Visual Analytics for Discovering Intersectional Bias in Machine Learningcited by 93
  13. 2021QA Dataset Explosion: A Taxonomy of NLP Resources for Question Answering and Reading Comprehensioncited by 91
  14. 2020Few-Shot Text Generation with Pattern-Exploiting Trainingcited by 87
  15. 2020The Turking Test: Can Language Models Understand Instructions?cited by 82
  16. 2020Learning from Task Descriptionscited by 78
  17. 2022Don't Blame the Annotator: Bias Already Starts in the Annotation Instructionscited by 47
  18. 2017The Effect of Different Writing Tasks on Linguistic Style: A Case Study of the ROC Story Cloze Taskcited by 39
  19. 2022The State of the Art in Enhancing Trust in Machine Learning Models with the Use of Visualizationscited by 29
  20. 2019Outlier Detection for Improved Data Quality and Diversity in Dialog Systemscited by 28
  21. 2019Explaining Vulnerabilities to Adversarial Machine Learning through Visual Analyticscited by 24
  22. 2021How Robust are Model Rankings: A Leaderboard Customization Approach for Equitable Evaluationcited by 24
  23. 2022ConceptExplainer: Interactive Explanation for Deep Neural Networks from a Concept Perspectivecited by 18
  24. 2022HELP ME THINK: A Simple Prompting Strategy for Non-experts to Create Customized Content with Modelscited by 17
  25. 2022How Many Data Samples is an Additional Instruction Worth?cited by 16
  26. 2020Visual Analysis of Discrimination in Machine Learningcited by 15
  27. 2020Our Evaluation Metric Needs an Update to Encourage Generalizationcited by 12

Built on by

Not cited yet.