2019
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.1909.02597
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Investigating BERT's Knowledge of Language: Five Analysis Methods with NPIs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Generating data lets us control the lexical and syntactic content so that we can guarantee that the sentence pairs in IMPPRES evaluate the desired phenomenon (see Ettinger et al, 2016, for related discussion). We generate IMPPRES according to expert-crafted grammars using a codebase developed by Warstadt et al (2019). The codebase includes a vocabulary of over 3000 lexical items annotated with grammatical features needed to ensure morphological, syntactic, and semantic well-formedness.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Generating data lets us control the lexical and syntactic content so that we can guarantee that the sentence pairs in IMPPRES evaluate the desired phenomenon (see Ettinger et al, 2016, for related discussion). We generate IMPPRES according to expert-crafted grammars using a codebase developed by Warstadt et al (2019). The codebase includes a vocabulary of over 3000 lexical items annotated with grammatical features needed to ensure morphological, syntactic, and semantic well-formedness.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This was the case even for sentences with distractor clauses between the subject and the verb, and meaningless sentences. A study of negative polarity items (NPIs) by Warstadt et al (2019) showed that BERT is better able to detect the presence of NPIs (e.g. "ever") and the words that allow their use (e.g.…”
Section: Linmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, different probing methods may reveal complementary or even contradictory information, in which case a single test (as done in most studies) would not be sufficient (Warstadt et al, 2019). Certain methods might also favor a certain model, e.g., RoBERTa is trailing BERT with one tree extraction method, but leading with another (Htut et al, 2019).…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, we also recognize that probing is one tool in the evaluation toolkit, and its results must be interpreted in context( [14], [15], [16]). To complement probing, future work might investigate model competence using tasks that require integrating multiple types of linguistic knowledge.…”
Section: Investigation Of Linguistic Information Through Probingmentioning
confidence: 99%