State-of-the-art natural language processing systems rely on supervision in the form of annotated data to learn competent models. These models are generally trained on data in a single language (usually English), and cannot be directly used beyond that language. Since collecting data in every language is not realistic, there has been a growing interest in crosslingual language understanding (XLU) and low-resource cross-language transfer. In this work, we construct an evaluation set for XLU by extending the development and test sets of the Multi-Genre Natural Language Inference Corpus (MultiNLI) to 15 languages, including low-resource languages such as Swahili and Urdu. We hope that our dataset, dubbed XNLI, will catalyze research in cross-lingual sentence understanding by providing an informative standard evaluation task. In addition, we provide several baselines for multilingual sentence understanding, including two based on machine translation systems, and two that use parallel data to train aligned multilingual bag-of-words and LSTM encoders. We find that XNLI represents a practical and challenging evaluation suite, and that directly translating the test data yields the best performance among available baselines.

Question answering (QA) models have shown rapid progress enabled by the availability of large, high-quality benchmark datasets. Such annotated datasets are difficult and costly to collect, and rarely exist in languages other than English, making building QA systems that work well in other languages challenging. In order to develop such systems, it is crucial to invest in high quality multilingual evaluation benchmarks to measure progress. We present MLQA, a multi-way aligned extractive QA evaluation benchmark intended to spur research in this area. 1 MLQA contains QA instances in 7 languages, English, Arabic, German, Spanish, Hindi, Vietnamese and Simplified Chinese. MLQA has over 12K instances in English and 5K in each other language, with each instance parallel between 4 languages on average. We evaluate stateof-the-art cross-lingual models and machinetranslation-based baselines on MLQA. In all cases, transfer results are significantly behind training-language performance.

Engaging in a debate with oneself or others to take decisions is an integral part of our day-today life. A debate on a topic (say, use of performance enhancing drugs) typically proceeds by one party making an assertion/claim (say, PEDs are bad for health) and then providing an evidence to support the claim (say, a 2006 study shows that PEDs have psychiatric side effects). In this work, we propose the task of automatically detecting such evidences from unstructured text that support a given claim. This task has many practical applications in decision support and persuasion enhancement in a wide range of domains. We first introduce an extensive benchmark data set tailored for this task, which allows training statistical models and assessing their performance. Then, we suggest a system architecture based on supervised learning to address the evidence detection task. Finally, promising experimental results are reported.

We describe a novel and unique argumentative structure dataset. This corpus consists of data extracted fro m hundreds of Wikipedia articles using a meticulously monitored manual annotation process. The result is 2,683 argument elements, collected in the context of 33 controversial topics, organized under a simp le claim-evidence structure. The obtained data are publicly available for academic research.

No abstract