mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Plausible Extractive Rationalization through Semi-Supervised Entailment Signal

arXiv 2402.08479 ↗First posted 13 Feb 2024cs.CLcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The increasing use of complex and opaque black box models requires the adoption of interpretable measures, one such option is extractive rationalizing models, which serve as a more interpretable alternative. These models, also known as Explain-Then-Predict models, employ an explainer model to extract rationales and subsequently condition the predictor with the extracted information. Their primary objective is to provide precise and faithful explanations, represented by the extracted rationales. In this paper, we take a semi-supervised approach to optimize for the plausibility of extracted rationales. We adopt a pre-trained natural language inference (NLI) model and further fine-tune it on a small set of supervised rationales (10%). The NLI predictor is leveraged as a source of supervisory signals to the explainer via entailment alignment. We show that, by enforcing the alignment agreement between the explanation and answer in a question-answering task, the performance can be improved without access to ground truth labels. We evaluate our approach on the ERASER dataset and show that our approach achieves comparable results with supervised extractive models and outperforms unsupervised approaches by > 100%.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Feb 2024.

Builds on

28 of 44 references.

References · 28

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  3. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  4. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  5. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  6. 2019BoolQ: Exploring the Surprising Difficulty of Natural Yes/No Questionscited by 2,140
  7. 2018FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERificationcited by 1,362
  8. 2021DeBERTaV3: Improving DeBERTa using ELECTRA-Style Pre-Training with Gradient-Disentangled Embedding Sharingcited by 1,219
  9. 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 916
  10. 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 629
  11. 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 590
  12. 2019Evaluating the Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarizationcited by 578
16 more
  1. 2019ERASER: A Benchmark to Evaluate Rationalized NLP Modelscited by 523
  2. 2021SummaC: Re-Visiting NLI-based Models for Inconsistency Detection in Summarizationcited by 402
  3. 2019Is Attention Interpretable?cited by 387
  4. 2016Rationalizing Neural Predictionscited by 281
  5. 2022ROSCOE: A Suite of Metrics for Scoring Step-by-Step Reasoningcited by 175
  6. 2023Factually Consistent Summarization via Reinforcement Learning with Textual Entailment Feedbackcited by 71
  7. 2020An Information Bottleneck Approach for Controlling Conciseness in Rationale Extractioncited by 69
  8. 2018Deriving Machine Attention from Human Rationalescited by 54
  9. 2020Towards Transparent and Explainable Attention Modelscited by 47
  10. 2020Why Attentions May Not Be Interpretable?cited by 41
  11. 2021Improving the Faithfulness of Attention-based Explanations with Task-specific Information for Text Classificationcited by 29
  12. 2023Rationalization for Explainable NLP: A Surveycited by 22
  13. 2020FiD-Ex: Improving Sequence-to-Sequence Models for Extractive Rationale Generationcited by 21
  14. 2021Enjoy the Salience: Towards Better Transformer-based Faithful Explanations with Word Saliencecited by 16
  15. 2020Why do you think that? Exploring Faithful Sentence-Level Rationales Without Supervisioncited by 15
  16. 2023ZARA: Improving Few-Shot Self-Rationalization for Small Language Modelscited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 3.

6 papers.