Filip Klubička

Organizers Of QueerInAI, Anaelia Ovalle, Arjun Subramonian et al. · allen-ai, cmu

We present Queer in AI as a case study for community-led participatory design in AI. We examine how participatory design and intersectional tenets started and shaped this community's programs over the years. We discuss different challenges that emerged in the process, look at ways this organization has fallen short of operationalizing participatory and intersectional principles, and then assess the organization's impact. Queer in AI provides important lessons and insights for practitioners and theorists of participatory methods broadly through its rejection of hierarchy in favor of decentralization, success at building aid and programs by and for the queer community, and effort to change actors and institutions outside of the queer community. Finally, we theorize how communities like Queer in AI contribute to the participatory design in AI more broadly by fostering cultures of participation in AI, welcoming and empowering marginalized participants, critiquing poor or exploitative participatory practices, and bringing participation to institutions outside of individual research projects. Queer in AI's work serves as a case study of grassroots activism and participatory methods within AI, demonstrating the potential of community-led participatory methods and intersectional praxis, while also providing challenges, case studies, and nuanced insights to researchers developing and using participatory methods.

Filip Klubička, Vasudevan Nedumpozhimana, John D. Kelleher

The goal of this paper is to learn more about how idiomatic information is structurally encoded in embeddings, using a structural probing method. We repurpose an existing English verbal multi-word expression (MWE) dataset to suit the probing framework and perform a comparative probing study of static (GloVe) and contextual (BERT) embeddings. Our experiments indicate that both encode some idiomatic information to varying degrees, but yield conflicting evidence as to whether idiomaticity is encoded in the vector norm, leaving this an open question. We also identify some limitations of the used dataset and highlight important directions for future work in improving its suitability for a probing analysis.

Filip Klubička, John D. Kelleher

Improving our understanding of how information is encoded in vector space can yield valuable interpretability insights. Alongside vector dimensions, we argue that it is possible for the vector norm to also carry linguistic information. We develop a method to test this: an extension of the probing framework which allows for relative intrinsic interpretations of probing results. It relies on introducing noise that ablates information encoded in embeddings, grounded in random baselines and confidence intervals. We apply the method to well-established probing tasks and find evidence that confirms the existence of separate information containers in English GloVe and BERT embeddings. Our correlation analysis aligns with the experimental findings that different encoders use the norm to encode different kinds of information: GloVe stores syntactic and sentence length information in the vector norm, while BERT uses it to encode contextual incongruity.

Filip Klubička, John D. Kelleher

Modelling taxonomic and thematic relatedness is important for building AI with comprehensive natural language understanding. The goal of this paper is to learn more about how taxonomic information is structurally encoded in embeddings. To do this, we design a new hypernym-hyponym probing task and perform a comparative probing study of taxonomic and thematic SGNS and GloVe embeddings. Our experiments indicate that both types of embeddings encode some taxonomic information, but the amount, as well as the geometric properties of the encodings, are independently related to both the encoder architecture, as well as the embedding training data. Specifically, we find that only taxonomic embeddings carry taxonomic information in their norm, which is determined by the underlying distribution in the data.

Anya Belz, Craig Thomson, Ehud Reiter et al.

We report our efforts in identifying a set of previous human evaluations in NLP that would be suitable for a coordinated study examining what makes human evaluations in NLP more/less reproducible. We present our results and findings, which include that just 13\% of papers had (i) sufficiently low barriers to reproduction, and (ii) enough obtainable information, to be considered for reproduction, and that all but one of the experiments we selected for reproduction was discovered to have flaws that made the meaningfulness of conducting a reproduction questionable. As a result, we had to change our coordinated study design from a reproduce approach to a standardise-then-reproduce-twice approach. Our overall (negative) finding that the great majority of human evaluations in NLP is not repeatable and/or not reproducible and/or too flawed to justify reproduction, paints a dire picture, but presents an opportunity for a rethink about how to design and report human evaluations in NLP.

Magdalena Kacmajor, John D. Kelleher, Filip Klubicka et al.

This paper connects a series of papers dealing with taxonomic word embeddings. It begins by noting that there are different types of semantic relatedness and that different lexical representations encode different forms of relatedness. A particularly important distinction within semantic relatedness is that of thematic versus taxonomic relatedness. Next, we present a number of experiments that analyse taxonomic embeddings that have been trained on a synthetic corpus that has been generated via a random walk over a taxonomy. These experiments demonstrate how the properties of the synthetic corpus, such as the percentage of rare words, are affected by the shape of the knowledge graph the corpus is generated from. Finally, we explore the interactions between the relative sizes of natural and synthetic corpora on the performance of embeddings when taxonomic and thematic embeddings are combined.

Filip Klubička, Giancarlo D. Salton, John D. Kelleher

Creating a linguistic resource is often done by using a machine learning model that filters the content that goes through to a human annotator, before going into the final resource. However, budgets are often limited, and the amount of available data exceeds the amount of affordable annotation. In order to optimize the benefit from the invested human work, we argue that deciding on which model one should employ depends not only on generalized evaluation metrics such as F-score, but also on the gain metric. Because the model with the highest F-score may not necessarily have the best sequencing of predicted classes, this may lead to wasting funds on annotating false positives, yielding zero improvement of the linguistic resource. We exemplify our point with a case study, using real data from a task of building a verb-noun idiom dictionary. We show that, given the choice of three systems with varying F-scores, the system with the highest F-score does not yield the highest profits. In other words, in our case the cost-benefit trade off is more favorable for a system with a lower F-score.

Filip Klubička, Raquel Fernández

As research on hate speech becomes more and more relevant every day, most of it is still focused on hate speech detection. By attempting to replicate a hate speech detection experiment performed on an existing Twitter corpus annotated for hate speech, we highlight some issues that arise from doing research in the field of hate speech, which is essentially still in its infancy. We take a critical look at the training corpus in order to understand its biases, while also using it to venture beyond hate speech detection and investigate whether it can be used to shed light on other facets of research, such as popularity of hate tweets.

Filip Klubička, Antonio Toral, Víctor M. Sánchez-Cartagena

This paper presents a quantitative fine-grained manual evaluation approach to comparing the performance of different machine translation (MT) systems. We build upon the well-established Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM) error taxonomy and implement a novel method that assesses whether the differences in performance for MQM error types between different MT systems are statistically significant. We conduct a case study for English-to-Croatian, a language direction that involves translating into a morphologically rich language, for which we compare three MT systems belonging to different paradigms: pure phrase-based, factored phrase-based and neural. First, we design an MQM-compliant error taxonomy tailored to the relevant linguistic phenomena of Slavic languages, which made the annotation process feasible and accurate. Errors in MT outputs were then annotated by two annotators following this taxonomy. Subsequently, we carried out a statistical analysis which showed that the best-performing system (neural) reduces the errors produced by the worst system (pure phrase-based) by more than half (54\%). Moreover, we conducted an additional analysis of agreement errors in which we distinguished between short (phrase-level) and long distance (sentence-level) errors. We discovered that phrase-based MT approaches are of limited use for long distance agreement phenomena, for which neural MT was found to be especially effective.