Evaluating Machine Intelligence with Question Answering

Humans ask questions to learn about the world and to test knowledge understanding. The ability to ask questions combines aspects of intelligence unique to humans: language understanding, knowledge representation, and reasoning. Thus, building systems capable of intelligent question answering (QA) is a grand goal of natural language processing (NLP). To measure progress in NLP, we create "exams" for computer systems and compare their effectiveness against a reference point---often based on humans. How precisely we measure progress depends on whether we are building computer systems that optimize human satisfaction in information-seeking tasks or that measure progress towards intelligent QA. In the first part of this dissertation, we explore each goal in turn, how they differ, and describe their relationship to QA formats. As an example of an information-seeking evaluation, we introduce a new dialog QA task paired with a new evaluation method. Afterward, we turn our attention to using QA to evaluate machine intelligence. A good evaluation should be able to discriminate between lesser and more capable QA models. This dissertation explores three ways to improve the discriminative power of QA evaluations: (1) dynamic weighting of test questions, (2) a format that by construction tests multiple levels of knowledge, and (3) evaluation data that is created through human-computer collaboration. By dynamically weighting test questions, we challenge a foundational assumption of the de facto standard in QA evaluation---the leaderboard. Namely, we contend that contrary to nearly all QA and NLP evaluations which implicitly assign equal weights to examples by averaging scores, that examples are not equally useful for estimating machine (or human) QA ability. As any student may tell you, not all questions on an exam are equally difficult and in the worst-case questions are unsolvable. Drawing on decades of research in educational testing, we propose adopting an alternative evaluation methodology---Item Response Theory---that is widely used to score human exams (e.g., the SAT). By dynamically weighting questions, we show that this improves the reliability of leaderboards in discriminating between models of differing QA ability while also being helpful in the construction of new evaluation datasets. Having improved the scoring of models, we next turn to improving the format and data in QA evaluations. Our idea is simple. In most QA tasks (e.g., Jeopardy!), each question tests a single level of knowledge; in our task (the trivia game Quizbowl), we test multiple levels of knowledge with each question. Since each question tests multiple levels of knowledge, this decreases the likelihood that we learn nothing about the difference between two models (i.e., they are both correct or both wrong), which substantially increases discriminative power. Despite the improved format, we next show that while our QA models defeat accomplished trivia players, that they are overly reliant on brittle pattern matching, which indicates a failure to intelligently answer questions. To mitigate this problem, we introduce a new framework for building evaluation data where humans and machines cooperatively craft trivia questions that are difficult to answer through clever pattern matching tricks alone---while being no harder for humans. We conclude by sketching a broader vision for QA evaluation that combines the three components of evaluation we improve---scoring, format, and data---to create living evaluations and re-imagine the role of leaderboards

REVISITING RECOGNIZING TEXTUAL ENTAILMENT FOR EVALUATING NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS

Recognizing Textual Entailment (RTE) began as a unified framework to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of Natural Language Processing (NLP) models. In recent years, RTE has evolved in the NLP community into a task that researchers focus on developing models for. This thesis revisits the tradition of RTE as an evaluation framework for NLP models, especially in the era of deep learning. Chapter 2 provides an overview of different approaches to evaluating NLP sys- tems, discusses prior RTE datasets, and argues why many of them do not serve as satisfactory tests to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of NLP systems. Chapter 3 presents a new large-scale diverse collection of RTE datasets (DNC) that tests how well NLP systems capture a range of semantic phenomena that are integral to un- derstanding human language. Chapter 4 demonstrates how the DNC can be used to evaluate reasoning capabilities of NLP models. Chapter 5 discusses the limits of RTE as an evaluation framework by illuminating how existing datasets contain biases that may enable crude modeling approaches to perform surprisingly well. The remaining aspects of the thesis focus on issues raised in Chapter 5. Chapter 6 addresses issues in prior RTE datasets focused on paraphrasing and presents a high-quality test set that can be used to analyze how robust RTE systems are to paraphrases. Chapter 7 demonstrates how modeling approaches on biases, e.g. adversarial learning, can enable RTE models overcome biases discussed in Chapter 5. Chapter 8 applies these methods to the task of discovering emergency needs during disaster events

Multi-modal post-editing of machine translation

As MT quality continues to improve, more and more translators switch from traditional translation from scratch to PE of MT output, which has been shown to save time and reduce errors. Instead of mainly generating text, translators are now asked to correct errors within otherwise helpful translation proposals, where repetitive MT errors make the process tiresome, while hard-to-spot errors make PE a cognitively demanding activity. Our contribution is three-fold: first, we explore whether interaction modalities other than mouse and keyboard could well support PE by creating and testing the MMPE translation environment. MMPE allows translators to cross out or hand-write text, drag and drop words for reordering, use spoken commands or hand gestures to manipulate text, or to combine any of these input modalities. Second, our interviews revealed that translators see value in automatically receiving additional translation support when a high CL is detected during PE. We therefore developed a sensor framework using a wide range of physiological and behavioral data to estimate perceived CL and tested it in three studies, showing that multi-modal, eye, heart, and skin measures can be used to make translation environments cognition-aware. Third, we present two multi-encoder Transformer architectures for APE and discuss how these can adapt MT output to a domain and thereby avoid correcting repetitive MT errors.Angesichts der stetig steigenden Qualität maschineller Übersetzungssysteme (MÜ) post-editieren (PE) immer mehr Übersetzer die MÜ-Ausgabe, was im Vergleich zur herkömmlichen Übersetzung Zeit spart und Fehler reduziert. Anstatt primär Text zu generieren, müssen Übersetzer nun Fehler in ansonsten hilfreichen Übersetzungsvorschlägen korrigieren. Dennoch bleibt die Arbeit durch wiederkehrende MÜ-Fehler mühsam und schwer zu erkennende Fehler fordern die Übersetzer kognitiv. Wir tragen auf drei Ebenen zur Verbesserung des PE bei: Erstens untersuchen wir, ob andere Interaktionsmodalitäten als Maus und Tastatur das PE unterstützen können, indem wir die Übersetzungsumgebung MMPE entwickeln und testen. MMPE ermöglicht es, Text handschriftlich, per Sprache oder über Handgesten zu verändern, Wörter per Drag & Drop neu anzuordnen oder all diese Eingabemodalitäten zu kombinieren. Zweitens stellen wir ein Sensor-Framework vor, das eine Vielzahl physiologischer und verhaltensbezogener Messwerte verwendet, um die kognitive Last (KL) abzuschätzen. In drei Studien konnten wir zeigen, dass multimodale Messung von Augen-, Herz- und Hautmerkmalen verwendet werden kann, um Übersetzungsumgebungen an die KL der Übersetzer anzupassen. Drittens stellen wir zwei Multi-Encoder-Transformer-Architekturen für das automatische Post-Editieren (APE) vor und erörtern, wie diese die MÜ-Ausgabe an eine Domäne anpassen und dadurch die Korrektur von sich wiederholenden MÜ-Fehlern vermeiden können.Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), Projekt MMP

Combating Attacks and Abuse in Large Online Communities

Internet users today are connected more widely and ubiquitously than ever before. As a result, various online communities are formed, ranging from online social networks (Facebook, Twitter), to mobile communities (Foursquare, Waze), to content/interests based networks (Wikipedia, Yelp, Quora). While users are benefiting from the ease of access to information and social interactions, there is a growing concern for users' security and privacy against various attacks such as spam, phishing, malware infection and identity theft. Combating attacks and abuse in online communities is challenging. First, today’s online communities are increasingly dependent on users and user-generated content. Securing online systems demands a deep understanding of the complex and often unpredictable human behaviors. Second, online communities can easily have millions or even billions of users, which requires the corresponding security mechanisms to be highly scalable. Finally, cybercriminals are constantly evolving to launch new types of attacks. This further demands high robustness of security defenses. In this thesis, we take concrete steps towards measuring, understanding, and defending against attacks and abuse in online communities. We begin with a series of empirical measurements to understand user behaviors in different online services and the uniquesecurity and privacy challenges that users are facing with. This effort covers a broad set of popular online services including social networks for question and answering (Quora), anonymous social networks (Whisper), and crowdsourced mobile communities (Waze). Despite the differences of specific online communities, our study provides a first look at their user activity patterns based on empirical data, and reveals the need for reliable mechanisms to curate user content, protect privacy, and defend against emerging attacks. Next, we turn our attention to attacks targeting online communities, with focus on spam campaigns. While traditional spam is mostly generated by automated software, attackers today start to introduce "human intelligence" to implement attacks. This is maliciouscrowdsourcing (or crowdturfing) where a large group of real-users are organized to carry out malicious campaigns, such as writing fake reviews or spreading rumors on social media. Using collective human efforts, attackers can easily bypass many existing defenses (e.g.,CAPTCHA). To understand the ecosystem of crowdturfing, we first use measurements to examine their detailed campaign organization, workers and revenue. Based on insights from empirical data, we develop effective machine learning classifiers to detect crowdturfingactivities. In the meantime, considering the adversarial nature of crowdturfing, we also build practical adversarial models to simulate how attackers can evade or disrupt machine learning based defenses. To aid in this effort, we next explore using user behavior models to detect a wider range of attacks. Instead of making assumptions about attacker behavior, our idea is to model normal user behaviors and capture (malicious) behaviors that are deviated from norm. In this way, we can detect previously unknown attacks. Our behavior model is based on detailed clickstream data, which are sequences of click events generated by users when using the service. We build a similarity graph where each user is a node and the edges are weightedby clickstream similarity. By partitioning this graph, we obtain "clusters" of users with similar behaviors. We then use a small set of known good users to "color" these clusters to differentiate the malicious ones. This technique has been adopted by real-world social networks (Renren and LinkedIn), and already detected unexpected attacks. Finally, we extend clickstream model to understanding more-grained behaviors of attackers (and real users), and tracking how user behavior changes over time. In summary, this thesis illustrates a data-driven approach to understanding and defending against attacks and abuse in online communities. Our measurements have revealed new insights about how attackers are evolving to bypass existing security defenses today. Inaddition, our data-driven systems provide new solutions for online services to gain a deep understanding of their users, and defend them from emerging attacks and abuse

Natural Language Processing: Emerging Neural Approaches and Applications

This Special Issue highlights the most recent research being carried out in the NLP field to discuss relative open issues, with a particular focus on both emerging approaches for language learning, understanding, production, and grounding interactively or autonomously from data in cognitive and neural systems, as well as on their potential or real applications in different domains

Examining university student satisfaction and barriers to taking online remote exams

Recent years have seen a surge in the popularity of online exams at universities, due to the greater convenience and flexibility they offer both students and institutions. Driven by the dearth of empirical data on distance learning students' satisfaction levels and the difficulties they face when taking online exams, a survey with 562 students at The Open University (UK) was conducted to gain insights into their experiences with this type of exam. Satisfaction was reported with the environment and exams, while work commitments and technical difficulties presented the greatest barriers. Gender, race and disability were also associated with different levels of satisfaction and barriers. This study adds to the increasing number of studies into online exams, demonstrating how this type of exam can still have a substantial effect on students experienced in online learning systems and technologies

Challenges for engineering students working with authentic complex problems

Engineers are important participants in solving societal, environmental and technical problems. However, due to an increasing complexity in relation to these problems new interdisciplinary competences are needed in engineering. Instead of students working with monodisciplinary problems, a situation where students work with authentic complex problems in interdisciplinary teams together with a company may scaffold development of new competences. The question is: What are the challenges for students structuring the work on authentic interdisciplinary problems? This study explores a three-day event where 7 students from Aalborg University (AAU) from four different faculties and one student from University College North Denmark (UCN), (6th-10th semester), worked in two groups at a large Danish company, solving authentic complex problems. The event was structured as a Hackathon where the students for three days worked with problem identification, problem analysis and finalizing with a pitch competition presenting their findings. During the event the students had workshops to support the work and they had the opportunity to use employees from the company as facilitators. It was an extracurricular activity during the summer holiday season. The methodology used for data collection was qualitative both in terms of observations and participants’ reflection reports. The students were observed during the whole event. Findings from this part of a larger study indicated, that students experience inability to transfer and transform project competences from their previous disciplinary experiences to an interdisciplinary setting