before_revision: In adversarial testing, we pose hard generalization tasks in order to gain insights into the solutions found by our models. What properties must a system have in order to succeed at these hard behavioral tasks? We argue that an essential factor is modular internal structure. Our central contribution is a new experimental method called 'interchange interventions', in which systematic manipulations of model-internal states are related to causal effects on their outputs, thereby allowing us to identify modular structure. Our work is grounded empirically in a new challenge Natural Language Inference dataset designed to assess systems on their ability to reason about entailment and negation. We find that a BERT model is strikingly successful at the systematic generalization task we pose using this dataset , and our active manipulations of model-internal vectors help us understand why: despite the densely interconnected nature of the BERT architecture, the learned model embeds modular, general theories of lexical entailment relations .
after_revision: We address whether neural models for Natural Language Inference (NLI) can learn the compositional interactions between lexical entailment and negation, using four methods: the behavioral evaluation methods of (1) challenge test sets and (2) systematic generalization tasks, and the structural evaluation methods of (3) probes and (4) interventions. To facilitate this holistic evaluation, we present Monotonicity NLI (MoNLI), a new naturalistic dataset focused on lexical entailment and negation. In our behavioral evaluations, we find that models trained on general-purpose NLI datasets fail systematically on MoNLI examples containing negation, but that MoNLI fine-tuning addresses this failure. In our structural evaluations, we look for evidence that our top-performing BERT-based model has learned to implement the monotonicity algorithm behind MoNLI. Probes yield evidence consistent with this conclusion , and our intervention experiments bolster this, showing that the causal dynamics of the model mirror the causal dynamics of this algorithm on subsets of MoNLI. This suggests that the BERT model at least partially embeds a theory of lexical entailment and negation at an algorithmic level .
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: In adversarial testing, we pose hard generalization tasks in order to gain insights into the solutions found by our models. What properties must a system have in order to succeed at these hard behavioral tasks? We argue that an essential factor is modular internal structure. Our central contribution is a new experimental method called 'interchange interventions', in which systematic manipulations of model-internal states are related to causal effects on their outputs, thereby allowing us to identify modular structure. Our work is grounded empirically in a new challenge Natural Language Inference dataset designed to assess systems on their ability to reason about
edit_actions: We address whether neural models for Natural Language Inference (NLI) can learn the compositional interactions between lexical entailment and negation, using four methods: the behavioral evaluation methods of (1) challenge test sets and (2) systematic generalization tasks, and the structural evaluation methods of (3) probes and (4) interventions. To facilitate this holistic evaluation, we present Monotonicity NLI (MoNLI), a new naturalistic dataset focused on lexical
edit_actions: meaning-changed
edit_actions: clarity meaning-changed meaning-changed
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: We find that a BERT model is strikingly successful at the systematic generalization task we pose using this dataset
edit_actions: In our behavioral evaluations, we find that models trained on general-purpose NLI datasets fail systematically on MoNLI examples containing negation, but that MoNLI fine-tuning addresses this failure. In our structural evaluations, we look for evidence that our top-performing BERT-based model has learned to implement the monotonicity algorithm behind MoNLI. Probes yield evidence consistent with this conclusion
edit_actions: meaning-changed
edit_actions: meaning-changed meaning-changed meaning-changed
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: active manipulations of model-internal vectors help us understand why: despite the densely interconnected nature of
edit_actions: intervention experiments bolster this, showing that the causal dynamics of
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: clarity clarity clarity
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: BERT architecture, the learned model embeds modular, general theories
edit_actions: model mirror the causal dynamics of this algorithm on subsets of MoNLI. This suggests that the BERT model at least partially embeds a theory
edit_actions: meaning-changed
edit_actions: meaning-changed meaning-changed meaning-changed
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: relations
edit_actions: and negation at an algorithmic level
edit_actions: meaning-changed
edit_actions: meaning-changed meaning-changed style