PyTorchKR Papers

최신 논문

총 6편
태그·기간 등 상세 필터

카테고리 탐색

로그인 후 이 태그 구독

arXiv:2411.01706공식 코드 · Papers with Code

Investigating Large Language Models for Complex Word Identification in Multilingual and Multidomain Setups

Complex Word Identification (CWI) is an essential step in the lexical simplification task and has recently become a task on its own. Some variations of this binary classification task have emerged, such as lexical complexity prediction (LCP) and complexity evaluation of multi-word expressions (MWE). Large language models (LLMs) recently became popular in the Natural Language Processing community because of their versatility and capability to solve unseen tasks in zero/few-shot settings. Our work investigates LLM usage, specifically open-source models such as Llama 2, Llama 3, and Vicuna v1.5, and closed-source, such as ChatGPT-3.5-turbo and GPT-4o, in the CWI, LCP, and MWE settings. We evaluate zero-shot, few-shot, and fine-tuning settings and show that LLMs struggle in certain conditions or achieve comparable results against existing methods. In addition, we provide some views on meta-learning combined with prompt learning. In the end, we conclude that the current state of LLMs cannot or barely outperform existing methods, which are usually much smaller.

arXiv:2410.18567공식 코드 · Papers with Code

Difficult for Whom? A Study of Japanese Lexical Complexity

The tasks of lexical complexity prediction (LCP) and complex word identification (CWI) commonly presuppose that difficult to understand words are shared by the target population. Meanwhile, personalization methods have also been proposed to adapt models to individual needs. We verify that a recent Japanese LCP dataset is representative of its target population by partially replicating the annotation. By another reannotation we show that native Chinese speakers perceive the complexity differently due to Sino-Japanese vocabulary. To explore the possibilities of personalization, we compare competitive baselines trained on the group mean ratings and individual ratings in terms of performance for an individual. We show that the model trained on a group mean performs similarly to an individual model in the CWI task, while achieving good LCP performance for an individual is difficult. We also experiment with adapting a finetuned BERT model, which results only in marginal improvements across all settings.

arXiv:2308.07556공식 코드 · Papers with Code

A User-Centered Evaluation of Spanish Text Simplification

We present an evaluation of text simplification (TS) in Spanish for a production system, by means of two corpora focused in both complex-sentence and complex-word identification. We compare the most prevalent Spanish-specific readability scores with neural networks, and show that the latter are consistently better at predicting user preferences regarding TS. As part of our analysis, we find that multilingual models underperform against equivalent Spanish-only models on the same task, yet all models focus too often on spurious statistical features, such as sentence length. We release the corpora in our evaluation to the broader community with the hopes of pushing forward the state-of-the-art in Spanish natural language processing.

arXiv:2106.02340공식 코드 · Papers with Code

cs60075_team2 at SemEval-2021 Task 1 : Lexical Complexity Prediction using Transformer-based Language Models pre-trained on various text corpora

This paper describes the performance of the team cs60075_team2 at SemEval 2021 Task 1 - Lexical Complexity Prediction. The main contribution of this paper is to fine-tune transformer-based language models pre-trained on several text corpora, some being general (E.g., Wikipedia, BooksCorpus), some being the corpora from which the CompLex Dataset was extracted, and others being from other specific domains such as Finance, Law, etc. We perform ablation studies on selecting the transformer models and how their individual complexity scores are aggregated to get the resulting complexity scores. Our method achieves a best Pearson Correlation of $0.784$ in sub-task 1 (single word) and $0.836$ in sub-task 2 (multiple word expressions).

arXiv:2005.05692공식 코드 · Papers with Code

Detecting Multiword Expression Type Helps Lexical Complexity Assessment

Multiword expressions (MWEs) represent lexemes that should be treated as single lexical units due to their idiosyncratic nature. Multiple NLP applications have been shown to benefit from MWE identification, however the research on lexical complexity of MWEs is still an under-explored area. In this work, we re-annotate the Complex Word Identification Shared Task 2018 dataset of Yimam et al. (2017), which provides complexity scores for a range of lexemes, with the types of MWEs. We release the MWE-annotated dataset with this paper, and we believe this dataset represents a valuable resource for the text simplification community. In addition, we investigate which types of expressions are most problematic for native and non-native readers. Finally, we show that a lexical complexity assessment system benefits from the information about MWE types.

arXiv:1904.05953공식 코드 · Papers with Code

Strong Baselines for Complex Word Identification across Multiple Languages

Complex Word Identification (CWI) is the task of identifying which words or phrases in a sentence are difficult to understand by a target audience. The latest CWI Shared Task released data for two settings: monolingual (i.e. train and test in the same language) and cross-lingual (i.e. test in a language not seen during training). The best monolingual models relied on language-dependent features, which do not generalise in the cross-lingual setting, while the best cross-lingual model used neural networks with multi-task learning. In this paper, we present monolingual and cross-lingual CWI models that perform as well as (or better than) most models submitted to the latest CWI Shared Task. We show that carefully selected features and simple learning models can achieve state-of-the-art performance, and result in strong baselines for future development in this area. Finally, we discuss how inconsistencies in the annotation of the data can explain some of the results obtained.