Vikash Bhardwaj

Ankit Arun, Soumya Batra, Vikas Bhardwaj et al.

Natural language generation (NLG) is a critical component in conversational systems, owing to its role of formulating a correct and natural text response. Traditionally, NLG components have been deployed using template-based solutions. Although neural network solutions recently developed in the research community have been shown to provide several benefits, deployment of such model-based solutions has been challenging due to high latency, correctness issues, and high data needs. In this paper, we present approaches that have helped us deploy data-efficient neural solutions for NLG in conversational systems to production. We describe a family of sampling and modeling techniques to attain production quality with light-weight neural network models using only a fraction of the data that would be necessary otherwise, and show a thorough comparison between each. Our results show that domain complexity dictates the appropriate approach to achieve high data efficiency. Finally, we distill the lessons from our experimental findings into a list of best practices for production-level NLG model development, and present them in a brief runbook. Importantly, the end products of all of the techniques are small sequence-to-sequence models (2Mb) that we can reliably deploy in production.

Phillip Keung, Yichao Lu, Julian Salazar et al.

Multilingual contextual embeddings have demonstrated state-of-the-art performance in zero-shot cross-lingual transfer learning, where multilingual BERT is fine-tuned on one source language and evaluated on a different target language. However, published results for mBERT zero-shot accuracy vary as much as 17 points on the MLDoc classification task across four papers. We show that the standard practice of using English dev accuracy for model selection in the zero-shot setting makes it difficult to obtain reproducible results on the MLDoc and XNLI tasks. English dev accuracy is often uncorrelated (or even anti-correlated) with target language accuracy, and zero-shot performance varies greatly at different points in the same fine-tuning run and between different fine-tuning runs. These reproducibility issues are also present for other tasks with different pre-trained embeddings (e.g., MLQA with XLM-R). We recommend providing oracle scores alongside zero-shot results: still fine-tune using English data, but choose a checkpoint with the target dev set. Reporting this upper bound makes results more consistent by avoiding arbitrarily bad checkpoints.