Language-modeling-based approaches to story plot generation attempt to construct a plot by sampling from a language model (LM) to predict the next character, word, or sentence to add to the story. LM techniques lack the ability to receive guidance from the user to achieve a specific goal, resulting in stories that don't have a clear sense of progression and lack coherence. We present a reward-shaping technique that analyzes a story corpus and produces intermediate rewards that are backpropagated into a pre-trained LM in order to guide the model towards a given goal. Automated evaluations show our technique can create a model that generates story plots which consistently achieve a specified goal. Human-subject studies show that the generated stories have more plausible event ordering than baseline plot generation techniques.

No abstract

The ease of access to pre-trained transformers has enabled developers to leverage large-scale language models to build exciting applications for their users. While such pre-trained models offer convenient starting points for researchers and developers, there is little consideration for the societal biases captured within these model risking perpetuation of racial, gender, and other harmful biases when these models are deployed at scale. In this paper, we investigate gender and racial bias across ubiquitous pre-trained language models, including GPT-2, XLNet, BERT, RoBERTa, ALBERT and Dis-tilBERT. We evaluate bias within pre-trained transformers using three metrics: WEAT, sequence likelihood, and pronoun ranking. We conclude with an experiment demonstrating the ineffectiveness of word-embedding techniques, such as WEAT, signaling the need for more robust bias testing in transformers.

Automated rationale generation is an approach for real-time explanation generation whereby a computational model learns to translate an autonomous agent's internal state and action data representations into natural language. Training on human explanation data can enable agents to learn to generate human-like explanations for their behavior. In this paper, using the context of an agent that plays Frogger, we describe (a) how to collect a corpus of explanations, (b) how to train a neural rationale generator to produce different styles of rationales, and (c) how people perceive these rationales. We conducted two user studies. The first study establishes the plausibility of each type of generated rationale and situates their user perceptions along the dimensions of confidence, humanlike-ness, adequate justification, and understandability. The second study further explores user preferences between the generated rationales with regard to confidence in the autonomous agent, communicating failure and unexpected behavior. Overall, we find alignment between the intended differences in features of the generated rationales and the perceived differences by users. Moreover, context permitting, participants preferred detailed rationales to form a stable mental model of the agent's behavior.

No abstract