mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

QRA++: Quantified Reproducibility Assessment for Common Types of Results in Natural Language Processing

arXiv 2505.17043 ↗First posted 13 May 2025cs.CL cs.AIcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Reproduction studies reported in NLP provide individual data points which in combination indicate worryingly low levels of reproducibility in the field. Because each reproduction study reports quantitative conclusions based on its own, often not explicitly stated, criteria for reproduction success/failure, the conclusions drawn are hard to interpret, compare, and learn from. In this paper, we present QRA++, a quantitative approach to reproducibility assessment that (i) produces continuous-valued degree of reproducibility assessments at three levels of granularity; (ii) utilises reproducibility measures that are directly comparable across different studies; and (iii) grounds expectations about degree of reproducibility in degree of similarity between experiments. QRA++ enables more informative reproducibility assessments to be conducted, and conclusions to be drawn about what causes reproducibility to be better/poorer. We illustrate this by applying QRA++ to three example sets of comparable experiments, revealing clear evidence that degree of reproducibility depends on similarity of experiment properties, but also system type and evaluation method.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 2 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 May 2025.

Builds on

2 of 58 references.

References · 2

  1. 2021Misinfo Reaction Frames: Reasoning about Readers' Reactions to News Headlinescited by 32
  2. 2018Experiments with Universal CEFR Classificationcited by 17

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.