Learning Implicit and Explicit Multi-task Interactions for Information Extraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Information extraction aims at extracting entities, relations, and so on, in text to support information retrieval systems. To extract information, researchers have considered multitask learning (ML) approaches. The conventional ML approach learns shared features across tasks, with the assumption that these features capture sufficient task interactions to learn expressive shared representations for task classification. However, such an assumption is flawed in different perspectives. First, the shared representation may contain noise introduced by another task; tasks coupled for multitask learning may have different complexities but this approach treats all tasks equally; the conventional approach has a flat structure that hinders the learning of explicit interactions. This approach, however, learns implicit interactions across tasks and often has a generalization ability that has benefited the learning of multitasks. In this article, we take advantage of implicit interactions learned by conventional approaches while alleviating the issues mentioned above by developing a Recurrent Interaction Network with an effective Early Prediction Integration (RIN-EPI) for multitask learning. Specifically, RIN-EPI learns implicit and explicit interactions across two different but related tasks. To effectively learn explicit interactions across tasks, we consider the correlations among the outputs of related tasks. It is, however, obvious that task outputs are unobservable during training, so we leverage the predictions at intermediate layers (referred to as early predictions) as proxies as well as shared features across tasks to learn explicit interactions through attention mechanisms and sequence learning models. By recurrently learning explicit interactions, we gradually improve predictions for the individual tasks in the multitask learning. We demonstrate the effectiveness of RIN-EPI on the learning of two mainstream multitasks for information extraction: (1) entity recognition and relation classification and (2) aspect and opinion term co-extraction. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the RIN-EPI architecture, where we achieve state-of-the-art results on several benchmark datasets.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".