Main Predicate and Their Arguments as Explanation Signals For Intent Classification
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Intent classification is crucial for conversational agents (chatbots), and deep learning models perform well in this area. However, little research has been done on the explainability of intent classification due to the absence of suitable benchmark data. Human annotation of explanation signals in text samples is time-consuming and costly. However, from inspection of data on intent classification, we see that, more often than not, the main verb denotes the action, and the direct object indicates the domain of conversation, serving as explanation signals for intent. This observation enables us to hypothesize that the main predicate in the text utterances, along with the arguments of the main predicate, can serve as explanation signals. Leveraging this, we introduce a new technique to automatically augment text samples from intent classification datasets with word-level explanations. We mark main predicates (primarily verbs) and their arguments (dependency relations) as explanation signals in benchmark intent classification datasets ATIS and SNIPS, creating a unique 21k-instance dataset for explainability. Further, we experiment with deep learning and language models. We observe that models that work well for classification do not perform well in explainability metrics like plausibility and faithfulness. We also observe that guiding models to focus on explanation signals from our dataset during training improves the plausibility Token F1 score by 3-4%, improving the model's reasoning.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Feb 2025.
Builds on
20 of 40 references.
References · 20
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
- 2015Show, Attend and Tell: Neural Image Caption Generation with Visual Attentioncited by 1,421
- 2014Convolutional Neural Networks for Sentence Classificationcited by 1,124
- 2019ERASER: A Benchmark to Evaluate Rationalized NLP Modelscited by 523
- 2020Efficient Intent Detection with Dual Sentence Encoderscited by 419
- 2020HateXplain: A Benchmark Dataset for Explainable Hate Speech Detectioncited by 403
- 2018Snips Voice Platform: an embedded Spoken Language Understanding system for private-by-design voice interfacescited by 376
- 2019BERT for Joint Intent Classification and Slot Fillingcited by 195
- 2022The Unreliability of Explanations in Few-shot Prompting for Textual Reasoningcited by 169
8 more
- 2020A Diagnostic Study of Explainability Techniques for Text Classificationcited by 158
- 2022Explanations from Large Language Models Make Small Reasoners Bettercited by 123
- 2019Incorporating Priors with Feature Attribution on Text Classificationcited by 68
- 2020A Co-Interactive Transformer for Joint Slot Filling and Intent Detectioncited by 61
- 2019Fine-grained Sentiment Analysis with Faithful Attentioncited by 23
- 2021Does BERT Learn as Humans Perceive? Understanding Linguistic Styles through Lexicacited by 23
- 2021On Explaining Your Explanations of BERT: An Empirical Study with Sequence Classificationcited by 21
- 2022Explainable Slot Type Attentions to Improve Joint Intent Detection and Slot Fillingcited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.