Idiomatic expressions are an integral part of human languages, often used to express complex ideas in compressed or conventional ways (e.g. eager beaver as a keen and enthusiastic person). However, their interpretations may not be straightforwardly linked to the meanings of their individual components in isolation and this may have an impact for compositional approaches. In this paper, we investigate to what extent word representation models are able to go beyond compositional word combinations and capture multiword expression idiomaticity and some of the expected properties related to idiomatic meanings. We focus on noun compounds of varying levels of idiomaticity in two languages (English and Portuguese), presenting a dataset of minimal pairs containing human idiomaticity judgments for each noun compound at both type and token levels, their paraphrases and their occurrences in naturalistic and sense-neutral contexts, totalling 32,200 sentences. We propose this set of minimal pairs for evaluating how well a model captures idiomatic meanings, and define a set of fine-grained metrics of Affinity and Scaled Similarity, to determine how sensitive the models are to perturbations that may lead to changes in idiomaticity. Affinity is a comparative measure of the similarity between an experimental item, a target and a potential distractor, and Scaled Similarity incorporates a rescaling factor to magnify the meaningful similarities within the spaces defined by each specific model. The results obtained with a variety of representative and widely used models indicate that, despite superficial indications to the contrary in the form of high similarities, idiomaticity is not yet accurately represented in current models. Moreover, the performance of models with different levels of contextualisation suggests that their ability to capture context is not yet able to go beyond more superficial lexical clues provided by the words and to actually incorporate the relevant semantic clues needed for idiomaticity. By proposing model-agnostic measures for assessing the ability of models to capture idiomaticity, this paper contributes to determining limitations in the handling of non-compositional structures, which is one of the directions that needs to be considered for more natural, accurate and robust language understanding. The source code and additional materials related to this paper are available at our GitHub repository.

In order to simplify sentences, several rewriting operations can be performed, such as replacing complex words per simpler synonyms, deleting unnecessary information, and splitting long sentences. Despite this multi-operation nature, evaluation of automatic simplification systems relies on metrics that moderately correlate with human judgments on the simplicity achieved by executing specific operations (e.g., simplicity gain based on lexical replacements). In this article, we investigate how well existing metrics can assess sentence-level simplifications where multiple operations may have been applied and which, therefore, require more general simplicity judgments. For that, we first collect a new and more reliable data set for evaluating the correlation of metrics and human judgments of overall simplicity. Second, we conduct the first meta-evaluation of automatic metrics in Text Simplification, using our new data set (and other existing data) to analyze the variation of the correlation between metrics’ scores and human judgments across three dimensions: the perceived simplicity level, the system type, and the set of references used for computation. We show that these three aspects affect the correlations and, in particular, highlight the limitations of commonly used operation-specific metrics. Finally, based on our findings, we propose a set of recommendations for automatic evaluation of multi-operation simplifications, suggesting which metrics to compute and how to interpret their scores.

Sentence Simplification (SS) aims to modify a sentence in order to make it easier to read and understand. In order to do so, several rewriting transformations can be performed such as replacement, reordering, and splitting. Executing these transformations while keeping sentences grammatical, preserving their main idea, and generating simpler output, is a challenging and still far from solved problem. In this article, we survey research on SS, focusing on approaches that attempt to learn how to simplify using corpora of aligned original-simplified sentence pairs in English, which is the dominant paradigm nowadays. We also include a benchmark of different approaches on common data sets so as to compare them and highlight their strengths and limitations. We expect that this survey will serve as a starting point for researchers interested in the task and help spark new ideas for future developments.