A Survey of Paraphrasing and Textual Entailment Methods

Paraphrasing methods recognize, generate, or extract phrases, sentences, or longer natural language expressions that convey almost the same information. Textual entailment methods, on the other hand, recognize, generate, or extract pairs of natural language expressions, such that a human who reads (and trusts) the first element of a pair would most likely infer that the other element is also true. Paraphrasing can be seen as bidirectional textual entailment and methods from the two areas are often similar. Both kinds of methods are useful, at least in principle, in a wide range of natural language processing applications, including question answering, summarization, text generation, and machine translation. We summarize key ideas from the two areas by considering in turn recognition, generation, and extraction methods, also pointing to prominent articles and resources.Comment: Technical Report, Natural Language Processing Group, Department of Informatics, Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece, 201

Improving the objective function in minimum error rate training

In Minimum Error Rate Training (MERT), the parameters of an SMT system are tuned on a certain evaluation metric to improve translation quality. In this paper, we present empirical results in which parameters tuned on one metric (e.g. BLEU) may not lead to optimal scores on the same metric. The score can be improved significantly by tuning on an entirely different metric (e.g. METEOR, by 0.82 BLEU points or 3.38% relative improvement on WMT08 English–French dataset). We analyse the impact of choice of objective function in MERT and further propose three combination strategies of different metrics to reduce the bias of a single metric, and obtain parameters that receive better scores (0.99 BLEU points or 4.08% relative improvement) on evaluation metrics than those tuned on the standalone metric itself

SMRT Chatbots: Improving Non-Task-Oriented Dialog with Simulated Multiple Reference Training

Non-task-oriented dialog models suffer from poor quality and non-diverse responses. To overcome limited conversational data, we apply Simulated Multiple Reference Training (SMRT; Khayrallah et al., 2020), and use a paraphraser to simulate multiple responses per training prompt. We find SMRT improves over a strong Transformer baseline as measured by human and automatic quality scores and lexical diversity. We also find SMRT is comparable to pretraining in human evaluation quality, and outperforms pretraining on automatic quality and lexical diversity, without requiring related-domain dialog data.Comment: EMNLP 2020 Camera Read