No abstract

Consider two competitive machine learning models, one of which was considered state-of-the art, and the other a competitive baseline. Suppose that by just permuting the examples of the training set, say by reversing the original order, by shuffling, or by mini-batching, you could report substantially better/worst performance for the system of your choice, by multiple percentage points. In this paper, we illustrate this scenario for a trending NLP task: Natural Language Inference (NLI). We show that for the two central NLI corpora today, the learning process of neural systems is far too sensitive to permutations of the data. In doing so we reopen the question of how to judge a good neural architecture for NLI, given the available dataset and perhaps, further, the soundness of the NLI task itself in its current state.

The field of Deep Learning (DL) has undergone explosive growth during the last decade, with a substantial impact on Natural Language Processing (NLP) as well. Yet, as with other fields employing DL techniques, there has been a lack of common experimental standards compared to more established disciplines. Starting from fundamental scientific principles, we distill ongoing discussions on experimental standards in DL into a single, widely-applicable methodology. Following these best practices is crucial to strengthening experimental evidence, improve reproducibility and enable scientific progress. These standards are further collected in a public repository to help them transparently adapt to future needs.

The field of Deep Learning (DL) has undergone explosive growth during the last decade, with a substantial impact on Natural Language Processing (NLP) as well. Yet, compared to more established disciplines, a lack of common experimental standards remains an open challenge to the field at large. Starting from fundamental scientific principles, we distill ongoing discussions on experimental standards in NLP into a single, widelyapplicable methodology. Following these best practices is crucial to strengthen experimental evidence, improve reproducibility and support scientific progress. These standards are further collected in a public repository to help them transparently adapt to future needs.

No abstract