# GLS-CSC: A Simple but Effective Strategy to Mitigate Chinese STM Models' Over-Reliance on Superficial Clue

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.04162 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.04162/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 29 of its 38 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Sep 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 29 of 29)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.11692/) (2019)
- ["Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.04938/) (2016)
- [HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07830/) (2019)
- [Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.07780/) (2020)
- [Right for the Wrong Reasons: Diagnosing Syntactic Heuristics in Natural Language Inference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.01007/) (2019)
- [Adversarial NLI: A New Benchmark for Natural Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.14599/) (2019)
- [CoQA: A Conversational Question Answering Challenge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1808.07042/) (2018)
- [Annotation Artifacts in Natural Language Inference Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.02324/) (2018)
- [Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.07328/) (2017)
- [Learning the Difference that Makes a Difference with Counterfactually-Augmented Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.12434/) (2019)
- [PAWS: Paraphrase Adversaries from Word Scrambling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.01130/) (2019)
- [QuAC : Question Answering in Context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1808.07036/) (2018)
- [ERNIE: Enhanced Representation through Knowledge Integration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09223/) (2019)
- [Hypothesis Only Baselines in Natural Language Inference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.01042/) (2018)
- [Don't Take the Easy Way Out: Ensemble Based Methods for Avoiding Known Dataset Biases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.03683/) (2019)
- [Stress Test Evaluation for Natural Language Inference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.00692/) (2018)
- [Adversarial Filters of Dataset Biases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.04108/) (2020)
- [Towards Debiasing Fact Verification Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.05267/) (2019)
- [End-to-End Bias Mitigation by Modelling Biases in Corpora](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.06321/) (2019)
- [Analyzing the Behavior of Visual Question Answering Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.07356/) (2016)
- [Unlearn Dataset Bias in Natural Language Inference by Fitting the Residual](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.10763/) (2019)
- [Towards Debiasing NLU Models from Unknown Biases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.12303/) (2020)
- [CBLUE: A Chinese Biomedical Language Understanding Evaluation Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.08087/) (2021)
- [Identifying and Mitigating Spurious Correlations for Improving Robustness in NLP Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.07736/) (2021)
- [When Choosing Plausible Alternatives, Clever Hans can be Clever](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.00225/) (2019)
- [Why Machine Reading Comprehension Models Learn Shortcuts?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.01024/) (2021)
- [Counterfactually-Augmented SNLI Training Data Does Not Yield Better Generalization Than Unaugmented Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.04762/) (2020)
- [Less Learn Shortcut: Analyzing and Mitigating Learning of Spurious Feature-Label Correlation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.12593/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Analyzing the Inherent Response Tendency of LLMs: Real-World Instructions-Driven Jailbreak](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.04127/) (2023)
- [Make Your Decision Convincing! A Unified Two-Stage Framework: Self-Attribution and Decision-Making](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13610/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Pre-trained models have achieved success in Chinese Short Text Matching (STM) tasks, but they often rely on superficial clues, leading to a lack of robust predictions. To address this issue, it is crucial to analyze and mitigate the influence of superficial clues on STM models. Our study aims to investigate their over-reliance on the edit distance feature, commonly used to measure the semantic similarity of Chinese text pairs, which can be considered a superficial clue. To mitigate STM models' over-reliance on superficial clues, we propose a novel resampling training strategy called Gradually Learn Samples Containing Superficial Clue (GLS-CSC). Through comprehensive evaluations of In-Domain (I.D.), Robustness (Rob.), and Out-Of-Domain (O.O.D.) test sets, we demonstrate that GLS-CSC outperforms existing methods in terms of enhancing the robustness and generalization of Chinese STM models. Moreover, we conduct a detailed analysis of existing methods and reveal their commonality.