Characterizing and Measuring Linguistic Dataset Drift
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
NLP models often degrade in performance when real world data distributions differ markedly from training data. However, existing dataset drift metrics in NLP have generally not considered specific dimensions of linguistic drift that affect model performance, and they have not been validated in their ability to predict model performance at the individual example level, where such metrics are often used in practice. In this paper, we propose three dimensions of linguistic dataset drift: vocabulary, structural, and semantic drift. These dimensions correspond to content word frequency divergences, syntactic divergences, and meaning changes not captured by word frequencies (e.g. lexical semantic change). We propose interpretable metrics for all three drift dimensions, and we modify past performance prediction methods to predict model performance at both the example and dataset level for English sentiment classification and natural language inference. We find that our drift metrics are more effective than previous metrics at predicting out-of-domain model accuracies (mean 16.8% root mean square error decrease), particularly when compared to popular fine-tuned embedding distances (mean 47.7% error decrease). Fine-tuned embedding distances are much more effective at ranking individual examples by expected performance, but decomposing into vocabulary, structural, and semantic drift produces the best example rankings of all considered model-agnostic drift metrics (mean 6.7% ROC AUC increase).
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 May 2023.
Builds on
25 of 59 references.
References · 25
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
- 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
- 2017A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inferencecited by 2,682
- 2020WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shiftscited by 1,375
- 2019What do you learn from context? Probing for sentence structure in contextualized word representationscited by 438
- 2020Universal Dependencies v2: An Evergrowing Multilingual Treebank Collectioncited by 271
- 2020What Happens To BERT Embeddings During Fine-tuning?cited by 113
- 2015Characterizing Concept Driftcited by 94
- 2020Analysing Lexical Semantic Change with Contextualised Word Representationscited by 92
- 2014Statistically Significant Detection of Linguistic Changecited by 82
- 2018Survey of Computational Approaches to Lexical Semantic Changecited by 62
13 more
- 2020A Survey on Contextual Embeddingscited by 48
- 2021Temporal Effects on Pre-trained Models for Language Processing Taskscited by 46
- 2020Exploring BERT's Sensitivity to Lexical Cues using Tests from Semantic Primingcited by 41
- 2021Explaining and Improving BERT Performance on Lexical Semantic Change Detectioncited by 34
- 2019Few-Shot Representation Learning for Out-Of-Vocabulary Wordscited by 30
- 2021Towards More Fine-grained and Reliable NLP Performance Predictioncited by 26
- 2020Domain Divergences: a Survey and Empirical Analysiscited by 24
- 2020Style-transfer and Paraphrase: Looking for a Sensible Semantic Similarity Metriccited by 23
- 2020Detecting Fine-Grained Cross-Lingual Semantic Divergences without Supervision by Learning to Rankcited by 18
- 2021Amazon SageMaker Model Monitor: A System for Real-Time Insights into Deployed Machine Learning Modelscited by 16
- 2021Sentence Similarity Based on Contextscited by 12
- 2017Data Selection Strategies for Multi-Domain Sentiment Analysiscited by 11
- 2021Re-evaluating Word Mover's Distancecited by 10
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.