关于NLP研究预登记的双向探讨
A Two-Sided Discussion of Preregistration of NLP Research
摘要：
Van Miltenburg et al.（2021）建议NLP研究应该采用预注册，以防止钓鱼式搜索，并促进负面结果的发表。从表面上看，这是一个非常合理的建议，似乎解决了NLP研究的许多方法论问题。我们讨论了利弊-一些旧的，一些新的：a）预注册受到结果已知后检索假设的实践的挑战; b）预注册可能会使NLP偏向验证性研究; c）预注册必须允许将研究重新分类为探索性研究; d）预注册可能会增加出版偏见; e）预注册可能会增加插旗; f）预注册可能会增加p-hacking;最后，g）预先登记可能会降低我们的风险容忍度。我们把我们的讨论作为一个对话，提出辩论的双方。
英文摘要：
Van Miltenburg et al. (2021) suggest NLP research should adopt preregistration to prevent fishing expeditions and to promote publication of negative results. At face value, this is a very reasonable suggestion, seemingly solving many methodological problems with NLP research. We discuss pros and cons -- some old, some new: a) Preregistration is challenged by the practice of retrieving hypotheses after the results are known; b) preregistration may bias NLP toward confirmatory research; c) preregistration must allow for reclassification of research as exploratory; d) preregistration may increase publication bias; e) preregistration may increase flag-planting; f) preregistration may increase p-hacking; and finally, g) preregistration may make us less risk tolerant. We cast our discussion as a dialogue, presenting both sides of the debate.
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。
