Despite the recent success of deep neural networks in natural language processing and other spheres of artificial intelligence, their interpretability remains a challenge. We analyze the representations learned by neural machine translation (NMT) models at various levels of granularity and evaluate their quality through relevant extrinsic properties. In particular, we seek answers to the following questions: (i) How accurately is word structure captured within the learned representations, which is an important aspect in translating morphologically rich languages? (ii) Do the representations capture long-range dependencies, and effectively handle syntactically divergent languages? (iii) Do the representations capture lexical semantics ? We conduct a thorough investigation along several parameters: (i) Which layers in the architecture capture each of these linguistic phenomena; (ii) How does the choice of translation unit (word, character, or subword unit) impact the linguistic properties captured by the underlying representations? (iii) Do the encoder and decoder learn differently and independently? (iv) Do the representations learned by multilingual NMT models capture the same amount of linguistic information as their bilingual counterparts? Our data-driven, quantitative evaluation illuminates important aspects in NMT models and their ability to capture various linguistic phenomena. We show that deep NMT models trained in an end-to-end fashion, without being provided any direct supervision during the training process, learn a non-trivial amount of linguistic information. Notable findings include the following observations: (i) Word morphology and part-of-speech information are captured at the lower layers of the model; (ii) In contrast, lexical semantics or non-local syntactic and semantic dependencies are better represented at the higher layers of the model; (iii) Representations learned using characters are more informed about word-morphology compared to those learned using subword units; and (iv) Representations learned by multilingual models are richer compared to bilingual models.

Recent developments in neural language models (LMs) have raised concerns about their potential misuse for automatically spreading misinformation. In light of these concerns, several studies have proposed to detect machine-generated fake news by capturing their stylistic differences from human-written text. These approaches, broadly termed stylometry, have found success in source attribution and misinformation detection in human-written texts. However, in this work, we show that stylometry is limited against machine-generated misinformation. Whereas humans speak differently when trying to deceive, LMs generate stylistically consistent text, regardless of underlying motive. Thus, though stylometry can successfully prevent impersonation by identifying text provenance, it fails to distinguish legitimate LM applications from those that introduce false information. We create two benchmarks demonstrating the stylistic similarity between malicious and legitimate uses of LMs, utilized in auto-completion and editing-assistance settings. 1 Our findings highlight the need for non-stylometry approaches in detecting machine-generated misinformation, and open up the discussion on the desired evaluation benchmarks.

We discuss weighted deductive parsing and consider the problem of finding the derivation with the lowest weight. We show that Knuth's generalization of Dijkstra's algorithm for the shortest-path problem offers a general method to solve this problem. Our approach is modular in the sense that Knuth's algorithm is formulated independently from the weighted deduction system.

This study discusses the effect of semi-supervised learning in combination with pretrained language models for data-to-text generation. It is not known whether semi-supervised learning is still helpful when a large-scale language model is also supplemented. This study aims to answer this question by comparing a data-to-text system only supplemented with a language model, to two data-to-text systems that are additionally enriched by a data augmentation or a pseudo-labeling semi-supervised learning approach. Results show that semi-supervised learning results in higher scores on diversity metrics. In terms of output quality, extending the training set of a data-to-text system with a language model using the pseudo-labeling approach did increase text quality scores, but the data augmentation approach yielded similar scores to the system without training set extension. These results indicate that semi-supervised learning approaches can bolster output quality and diversity, even when a language model is also present.

As evaluations of computational linguistics technology progress toward higher-level interpretation tasks, the problem of determining alignments between system responses and answer key entries may become less straightforward. We present an extensive analysis of the alignment procedure used in the MUC-6 evaluation of information extraction technology, which reveals effects that interfere with the stated goals of the evaluation. These effects are shown to be pervasive enough that they have the potential to adversely impact the technology development process. These results argue strongly for the use of accurate alignment criteria in natural language evaluations, and for maintaining the independence of alignment criteria and mechanisms used to calculate scores.

The remarkable ability of large language models (LLMs) to comprehend, interpret, and generate complex language has rapidly integrated LLM-generated text into various aspects of daily life, where users increasingly accept it. However, the growing reliance on LLMs underscores the urgent need for effective detection mechanisms to identify LLM-generated text. Such mechanisms are critical to mitigating misuse and safeguarding domains like artistic expression and social networks from potential negative consequences. LLM-generated text detection, conceptualized as a binary classification task, seeks to determine whether an LLM produced a given text. Recent advances in this field stem from innovations in watermarking techniques, statistics-based detectors, and neural-based detectors. Human-assisted methods also play a crucial role. In this survey, we consolidate recent research breakthroughs in this field, emphasizing the urgent need to strengthen detector research. Additionally, we review existing datasets, highlighting their limitations and developmental requirements. Furthermore, we examine various LLM-generated text detection paradigms, shedding light on challenges like out-of-distribution problems, potential attacks, real-world data issues, and ineffective evaluation frameworks. Finally, we outline intriguing directions for future research in LLM-generated text detection to advance responsible artificial intelligence. This survey aims to provide a clear and comprehensive introduction for newcomers while offering seasoned researchers valuable updates in the field. 1

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in everyday life and research. One of the most common use cases is conversational interactions, enabled by the language generation capabilities of LLMs. Just as between two humans, a conversation between an LLM-powered entity and a human depends on the personality of the conversants. However, measuring the personality of a given LLM is currently a challenge. This article introduces the Language Model Linguistic Personality Assessment (LMLPA), a system designed to evaluate the linguistic personalities of LLMs. Our system helps to understand LLMs’ language generation capabilities by quantitatively assessing the distinct personality traits reflected in their linguistic outputs. Unlike traditional human-centric psychometrics, the LMLPA adapts a personality assessment questionnaire, specifically the Big Five Inventory, to align with the operational capabilities of LLMs, and also incorporates the findings from previous language-based personality measurement literature. To mitigate sensitivity to the order of options, our questionnaire is designed to be open-ended, resulting in textual answers. Thus, the Artificial Intelligence (AI) rater is needed to transform ambiguous personality information from text responses into clear numerical indicators of personality traits. Utilizing Principal Component Analysis and reliability validation methods, our findings demonstrate that LLMs possess distinct personality traits that can be effectively quantified by the LMLPA. This research contributes to Human-Centered AI and Computational Linguistics, providing a robust framework for future studies to refine AI personality assessments and expand their applications in multiple areas, including education and manufacturing.

Ancient languages preserve the cultures and histories of the past. However, their study is fraught with difficulties, and experts must tackle a range of challenging text-based tasks, from deciphering lost languages to restoring damaged inscriptions, to determining the authorship of works of literature. Technological aids have long supported the study of ancient texts, but in recent years advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning have enabled analyses on a scale and in a detail that are reshaping the field of humanities, similarly to how microscopes and telescopes have contributed to the realm of science. This article aims to provide a comprehensive survey of published research using machine learning for the study of ancient texts written in any language, script, and medium, spanning over three and a half millennia of civilizations around the ancient world. To analyze the relevant literature, we introduce a taxonomy of tasks inspired by the steps involved in the study of ancient documents: digitization, restoration, attribution, linguistic analysis, textual criticism, translation, and decipherment. This work offers three major contributions: first, mapping the interdisciplinary field carved out by the synergy between the humanities and machine learning; second, highlighting how active collaboration between specialists from both fields is key to producing impactful and compelling scholarship; third, highlighting promising directions for future work in this field. Thus, this work promotes and supports the continued collaborative impetus between the humanities and machine learning.

We propose a question answering (QA) approach for standardized science exams that both identifies correct answers and produces compelling human-readable justifications for why those answers are correct. Our method first identifies the actual information needed in a question using psycholinguistic concreteness norms, then uses this information need to construct answer justifications by aggregating multiple sentences from different knowledge bases using syntactic and lexical information. We then jointly rank answers and their justifications using a reranking perceptron that treats justification quality as a latent variable. We evaluate our method on 1,000 multiple-choice questions from elementary school science exams, and empirically demonstrate that it performs better than several strong baselines, including neural network approaches. Our best configuration answers 44% of the questions correctly, where the top justifications for 57% of these correct answers contain a compelling human-readable justification that explains the inference required to arrive at the correct answer. We include a detailed characterization of the justification quality for both our method and a strong baseline, and show that information aggregation is key to addressing the information need in complex questions.

We introduce the Computational Linguistics special issue on Multilingual and Interlingual Semantic Representations for Natural Language Processing. We situate the special issue’s five articles in the context of our fast-changing field, explaining our motivation for this project. We offer a brief summary of the work in the issue, which includes developments on lexical and sentential semantic representations, from symbolic and neural perspectives.

Grammatical Error Correction (GEC) is the task of automatically detecting and correcting errors in text. The task not only includes the correction of grammatical errors, such as missing prepositions and mismatched subject–verb agreement, but also orthographic and semantic errors, such as misspellings and word choice errors, respectively. The field has seen significant progress in the last decade, motivated in part by a series of five shared tasks, which drove the development of rule-based methods, statistical classifiers, statistical machine translation, and finally neural machine translation systems, which represent the current dominant state of the art. In this survey paper, we condense the field into a single article and first outline some of the linguistic challenges of the task, introduce the most popular datasets that are available to researchers (for both English and other languages), and summarize the various methods and techniques that have been developed with a particular focus on artificial error generation. We next describe the many different approaches to evaluation as well as concerns surrounding metric reliability, especially in relation to subjective human judgments, before concluding with an overview of recent progress and suggestions for future work and remaining challenges. We hope that this survey will serve as a comprehensive resource for researchers who are new to the field or who want to be kept apprised of recent developments.

Humans acquire their native languages by taking part in communicative interactions with their caregivers. These interactions are meaningful, intentional, and situated in their everyday environment. The situated and communicative nature of the interactions is essential to the language acquisition process, as language learners depend on clues provided by the communicative environment to make sense of the utterances they perceive. As such, the linguistic knowledge they build up is rooted in linguistic forms, their meaning, and their communicative function. When it comes to machines, the situated, communicative, and interactional aspects of language learning are often passed over. This applies in particular to today’s large language models (LLMs), where the input is predominantly text-based, and where the distribution of character groups or words serves as a basis for modeling the meaning of linguistic expressions. In this article, we argue that this design choice lies at the root of a number of important limitations, in particular regarding the data hungriness of the models, their limited ability to perform human-like logical and pragmatic reasoning, and their susceptibility to biases. At the same time, we make a case for an alternative approach that models how artificial agents can acquire linguistic structures by participating in situated communicative interactions. Through a selection of experiments, we show how the linguistic knowledge that is captured in the resulting models is of a fundamentally different nature than the knowledge captured by LLMs and argue that this change of perspective provides a promising path towards more human-like language processing in machines.

Semantic role labeling, the computational identification and labeling of arguments in text, has become a leading task in computational linguistics today. Although the issues for this task have been studied for decades, the availability of large resources and the development of statistical machine learning methods have heightened the amount of effort in this field. This special issue presents selected and representative work in the field. This overview describes linguistic background of the problem, the movement from linguistic theories to computational practice, the major resources that are being used, an overview of steps taken in computational systems, and a description of the key issues and results in semantic role labeling (as revealed in several international evaluations). We assess weaknesses in semantic role labeling and identify important challenges facing the field. Overall, the opportunities and the potential for useful further research in semantic role labeling are considerable.

Word embeddings are vectorial semantic representations built with either counting or predicting techniques aimed at capturing shades of meaning from word co-occurrences. Since their introduction, these representations have been criticized for lacking interpretable dimensions. This property of word embeddings limits our understanding of the semantic features they actually encode. Moreover, it contributes to the “black box” nature of the tasks in which they are used, since the reasons for word embedding performance often remain opaque to humans. In this contribution, we explore the semantic properties encoded in word embeddings by mapping them onto interpretable vectors, consisting of explicit and neurobiologically motivated semantic features (Binder et al. 2016 ). Our exploration takes into account different types of embeddings, including factorized count vectors and predict models (Skip-Gram, GloVe, etc.), as well as the most recent contextualized representations (i.e., ELMo and BERT). In our analysis, we first evaluate the quality of the mapping in a retrieval task, then we shed light on the semantic features that are better encoded in each embedding type. A large number of probing tasks is finally set to assess how the original and the mapped embeddings perform in discriminating semantic categories. For each probing task, we identify the most relevant semantic features and we show that there is a correlation between the embedding performance and how they encode those features. This study sets itself as a step forward in understanding which aspects of meaning are captured by vector spaces, by proposing a new and simple method to carve human-interpretable semantic representations from distributional vectors.

This article describes three statistical models for natural language parsing. The models extend methods from probabilistic context-free grammars to lexicalized grammars, leading to approaches in which a parse tree is represented as the sequence of decisions corresponding to a head-centered, top-down derivation of the tree. Independence assumptions then lead to parameters that encode the X-bar schema, subcategorization, ordering of complements, placement of adjuncts, bigram lexical dependencies, wh -movement, and preferences for close attachment. All of these preferences are expressed by probabilities conditioned on lexical heads. The models are evaluated on the Penn Wall Street Journal Treebank, showing that their accuracy is competitive with other models in the literature. To gain a better understanding of the models, we also give results on different constituent types, as well as a breakdown of precision/recall results in recovering various types of dependencies. We analyze various characteristics of the models through experiments on parsing accuracy, by collecting frequencies of various structures in the treebank, and through linguistically motivated examples. Finally, we compare the models to others that have been applied to parsing the treebank, aiming to give some explanation of the difference in performance of the various models.