arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2009.10684cs.CLcs.AIcs.LG
收藏

让我们停止端到端关系抽取中的不正确比较!

Let's Stop Incorrect Comparisons in End-to-end Relation Extraction!

Sorbonne Université(索邦大学);CNRS(法国国家科学研究中心);Laboratoire d’Informatique de Paris 6(巴黎第六大学计算机实验室);LIP6(LIP6实验室);BNP Paribas(法国巴黎银行);Criteo AI Lab(Criteo人工智能实验室)

Bruno Taillé, Vincent Guigue, Geoffrey Scoutheeten, Patrick Gallinari

摘要:

尽管努力区分三种不同的评估设置(Bekoulis等人,2018年),许多端到端关系抽取(RE)文章与以前的工作进行了不可靠的性能比较。在本文中,我们首先确定了几种模式的无效比较在已发表的论文,并描述它们,以避免其传播。然后,我们提出了一个小型的实证研究,以量化最常见的错误的影响,并评估它会导致高估最终RE性能约5%的ACE 05。我们还抓住这个机会来研究两个最近发展的未探索的消融:使用语言模型预训练(特别是BERT)和跨度级NER。该荟萃分析强调了评估设置和数据集统计报告的严谨性,我们呼吁在端到端RE中统一评估设置。

英文摘要:

Despite efforts to distinguish three different evaluation setups (Bekoulis et al., 2018), numerous end-to-end Relation Extraction (RE) articles present unreliable performance comparison to previous work. In this paper, we first identify several patterns of invalid comparisons in published papers and describe them to avoid their propagation. We then propose a small empirical study to quantify the impact of the most common mistake and evaluate it leads to overestimating the final RE performance by around 5% on ACE05. We also seize this opportunity to study the unexplored ablations of two recent developments: the use of language model pretraining (specifically BERT) and span-level NER. This meta-analysis emphasizes the need for rigor in the report of both the evaluation setting and the datasets statistics and we call for unifying the evaluation setting in end-to-end RE.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑