mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Models of reference production: How do they withstand the test of time?

arXiv 2307.14817 ↗First posted 27 Jul 2023cs.CLcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In recent years, many NLP studies have focused solely on performance improvement. In this work, we focus on the linguistic and scientific aspects of NLP. We use the task of generating referring expressions in context (REG-in-context) as a case study and start our analysis from GREC, a comprehensive set of shared tasks in English that addressed this topic over a decade ago. We ask what the performance of models would be if we assessed them (1) on more realistic datasets, and (2) using more advanced methods. We test the models using different evaluation metrics and feature selection experiments. We conclude that GREC can no longer be regarded as offering a reliable assessment of models' ability to mimic human reference production, because the results are highly impacted by the choice of corpus and evaluation metrics. Our results also suggest that pre-trained language models are less dependent on the choice of corpus than classic Machine Learning models, and therefore make more robust class predictions.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Jul 2023.

Builds on

6 of 38 references.

References · 6

  1. 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
  2. 2019Neural data-to-text generation: A comparison between pipeline and end-to-end architecturescited by 51
  3. 2018NeuralREG: An end-to-end approach to referring expression generationcited by 7
  4. 2022Non-neural Models Matter: A Re-evaluation of Neural Referring Expression Generation Systemscited by 7
  5. 2019Referring Expression Generation Using Entity Profilescited by 6
  6. 2021What can Neural Referential Form Selectors Learn?cited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2.

2 papers.