mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Experience and Prediction: A Metric of Hardness for a Novel Litmus Test

arXiv 2309.02534 ↗First posted 5 Sep 2023cs.AI cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In the last decade, the Winograd Schema Challenge (WSC) has become a central aspect of the research community as a novel litmus test. Consequently, the WSC has spurred research interest because it can be seen as the means to understand human behavior. In this regard, the development of new techniques has made possible the usage of Winograd schemas in various fields, such as the design of novel forms of CAPTCHAs. Work from the literature that established a baseline for human adult performance on the WSC has shown that not all schemas are the same, meaning that they could potentially be categorized according to their perceived hardness for humans. In this regard, this textithardness-metric could be used in future challenges or in the WSC CAPTCHA service to differentiate between Winograd schemas. Recent work of ours has shown that this could be achieved via the design of an automated system that is able to output the hardness-indexes of Winograd schemas, albeit with limitations regarding the number of schemas it could be applied on. This paper adds to previous research by presenting a new system that is based on Machine Learning (ML), able to output the hardness of any Winograd schema faster and more accurately than any other previously used method. Our developed system, which works within two different approaches, namely the random forest and deep learning (LSTM-based), is ready to be used as an extension of any other system that aims to differentiate between Winograd schemas, according to their perceived hardness for humans. At the same time, along with our developed system we extend previous work by presenting the results of a large-scale experiment that shows how human performance varies across Winograd schemas.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 68 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Sep 2023.

Builds on

21 of 68 references.

References · 21

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  3. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
  4. 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
  5. 2018CommonsenseQA: A Question Answering Challenge Targeting Commonsense Knowledgecited by 1,822
  6. 2016ConceptNet 5.5: An Open Multilingual Graph of General Knowledgecited by 1,067
  7. 2014Deep Learning in Neural Networks: An Overviewcited by 770
  8. 2018Gender Bias in Coreference Resolution: Evaluation and Debiasing Methodscited by 659
  9. 2018Gender Bias in Coreference Resolutioncited by 442
  10. 2016FastText.zip: Compressing text classification modelscited by 335
  11. 2019Abductive Commonsense Reasoningcited by 301
  12. 2018A Simple Method for Commonsense Reasoningcited by 223
9 more
  1. 2018When and Why are Pre-trained Word Embeddings Useful for Neural Machine Translation?cited by 126
  2. 2018Hyperparameters and Tuning Strategies for Random Forestcited by 84
  3. 2019A Surprisingly Robust Trick for Winograd Schema Challengecited by 30
  4. 2020A Review of Winograd Schema Challenge Datasets and Approachescited by 27
  5. 2016Probabilistic Reasoning via Deep Learning: Neural Association Modelscited by 20
  6. 2019WikiCREM: A Large Unsupervised Corpus for Coreference Resolutioncited by 11
  7. 2018A Knowledge Hunting Framework for Common Sense Reasoningcited by 10
  8. 2019Solving Hard Coreference Problemscited by 9
  9. 2020TTTTTackling WinoGrande Schemascited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.