MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6901662332 · doi:10.60692/9jftz-jtd84

Bridging the Gap between Language Models and Cross-Lingual Sequence Labeling

2022· article· en· W6901662332 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)Language modelSequence labelingMargin (machine learning)Regularization (linguistics)Structured predictionTask (project management)Consistency (knowledge bases)Sequence (biology)Security token

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-scale cross-lingual pre-trained language models (xPLMs) have shown effectiveness in cross-lingual sequence labeling tasks (xSL), such as cross-lingual machine reading comprehension (xMRC) by transferring knowledge from a high-resource language to low-resource languages.Despite the great success, we draw an empirical observation that there is a training objective gap between pre-training and finetuning stages: e.g., mask language modeling objective requires local understanding of the masked token and the span-extraction objective requires global understanding and reasoning of the input passage/paragraph and question, leading to the discrepancy between pretraining and xMRC.In this paper, we first design a pre-training task tailored for xSL named Cross-lingual Language Informative Span Masking (CLISM) to eliminate the objective gap in a self-supervised manner.Second, we present ContrAstive-Consistency Regularization (CACR), which utilizes contrastive learning to encourage the consistency between representations of input parallel sequences via unsupervised cross-lingual instance-wise training signals during pre-training.By these means, our methods not only bridge the gap between pretrain-finetune, but also enhance PLMs to better capture the alignment between different languages.Extensive experiments prove that our method achieves clearly superior results on multiple xSL benchmarks with limited pretraining data.Our methods also surpass the previous state-of-the-art methods by a large margin in few-shot data settings, where only a few hundred training examples are available.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207