mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Pay Attention to Real World Perturbations! Natural Robustness Evaluation in Machine Reading Comprehension

arXiv 2502.16523 ↗First posted 23 Feb 2025cs.CL cs.AIcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As neural language models achieve human-comparable performance on Machine Reading Comprehension (MRC) and see widespread adoption, ensuring their robustness in real-world scenarios has become increasingly important. Current robustness evaluation research, though, primarily develops synthetic perturbation methods, leaving unclear how well they reflect real life scenarios. Considering this, we present a framework to automatically examine MRC models on naturally occurring textual perturbations, by replacing paragraph in MRC benchmarks with their counterparts based on available Wikipedia edit history. Such perturbation type is natural as its design does not stem from an arteficial generative process, inherently distinct from the previously investigated synthetic approaches. In a large-scale study encompassing SQUAD datasets and various model architectures we observe that natural perturbations result in performance degradation in pre-trained encoder language models. More worryingly, these state-of-the-art Flan-T5 and Large Language Models (LLMs) inherit these errors. Further experiments demonstrate that our findings generalise to natural perturbations found in other more challenging MRC benchmarks. In an effort to mitigate these errors, we show that it is possible to improve the robustness to natural perturbations by training on naturally or synthetically perturbed examples, though a noticeable gap still remains compared to performance on unperturbed data.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 42 of its 68 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Feb 2025.

Builds on

42 of 68 references.

References · 42

  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. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
  5. 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,944
  6. 2019DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lightercited by 4,307
  7. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
  8. 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,780
  9. 2018HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answeringcited by 3,754
  10. 2019ALBERT: A Lite BERT for Self-supervised Learning of Language Representationscited by 2,790
  11. 2019BoolQ: Exploring the Surprising Difficulty of Natural Yes/No Questionscited by 2,183
  12. 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,181
30 more
  1. 2024Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Sizecited by 1,998
  2. 2018Know What You Don't Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuADcited by 1,554
  3. 2019Natural Adversarial Examplescited by 1,408
  4. 2019DROP: A Reading Comprehension Benchmark Requiring Discrete Reasoning Over Paragraphscited by 903
  5. 2019SpanBERT: Improving Pre-training by Representing and Predicting Spanscited by 834
  6. 2024OLMo: Accelerating the Science of Language Modelscited by 613
  7. 2017Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systemscited by 571
  8. 2023The Falcon Series of Open Language Modelscited by 535
  9. 2020TyDi QA: A Benchmark for Information-Seeking Question Answering in Typologically Diverse Languagescited by 488
  10. 2017Synthetic and Natural Noise Both Break Neural Machine Translationcited by 306
  11. 2018Stress Test Evaluation for Natural Language Inferencecited by 213
  12. 2020Beat the AI: Investigating Adversarial Human Annotation for Reading Comprehensioncited by 131
  13. 2020It's Morphin' Time! Combating Linguistic Discrimination with Inflectional Perturbationscited by 64
  14. 2019Avoiding Reasoning Shortcuts: Adversarial Evaluation, Training, and Model Development for Multi-Hop QAcited by 63
  15. 2021Why Machine Reading Comprehension Models Learn Shortcuts?cited by 40
  16. 2020From Hero to Z'eroe: A Benchmark of Low-Level Adversarial Attackscited by 36
  17. 2021Code-Mixing on Sesame Street: Dawn of the Adversarial Polyglotscited by 23
  18. 2023What's the Meaning of Superhuman Performance in Today's NLU?cited by 23
  19. 2020A Framework for Evaluation of Machine Reading Comprehension Gold Standardscited by 18
  20. 2020Benchmarking Robustness of Machine Reading Comprehension Modelscited by 18
  21. 2023How do humans perceive adversarial text? A reality check on the validity and naturalness of word-based adversarial attackscited by 18
  22. 2021On the Robustness of Reading Comprehension Models to Entity Renamingcited by 17
  23. 2022TASA: Deceiving Question Answering Models by Twin Answer Sentences Attackcited by 15
  24. 2020Semantics Altering Modifications for Evaluating Comprehension in Machine Readingcited by 13
  25. 2023Guiding LLM to Fool Itself: Automatically Manipulating Machine Reading Comprehension Shortcut Triggerscited by 10
  26. 2024Seemingly Plausible Distractors in Multi-Hop Reasoning: Are Large Language Models Attentive Readers?cited by 10
  27. 2020Undersensitivity in Neural Reading Comprehensioncited by 9
  28. 2023Whispers of Doubt Amidst Echoes of Triumph in NLP Robustnesscited by 5
  29. 2022Mining Naturally-occurring Corrections and Paraphrases from Wikipedia's Revision Historycited by 4
  30. 2023The Impacts of Unanswerable Questions on the Robustness of Machine Reading Comprehension Modelscited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

2 papers.