MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177337627 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v35i14.17524

Analogy Training Multilingual Encoders

2021· article· en· W3177337627 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicolas Garneau, Mareike Hartmann, Anders Sandholm, Sebastian Ruder, Ivan Vulić, Anders Søgaard

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersH. Lundbeck A/SNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaLundbeckfonden
KeywordsAnalogyComputer scienceNatural language processingEncoderSentenceArtificial intelligenceWord (group theory)Encoding (memory)Linguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Language encoders encode words and phrases in ways that capture their local semantic relatedness, but are known to be globally inconsistent. Global inconsistency can seemingly be corrected for, in part, by leveraging signals from knowledge bases, but previous results are partial and limited to monolingual English encoders. We extract a large-scale multilingual, multi-word analogy dataset from Wikidata for diagnosing and correcting for global inconsistencies, and then implement a four-way Siamese BERT architecture for grounding multilingual BERT (mBERT) in Wikidata through analogy training. We show that analogy training not only improves the global consistency of mBERT, as well as the isomorphism of language-specific subspaces, but also leads to consistent gains on downstream tasks such as bilingual dictionary induction and sentence retrieval.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.155
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.169 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207