Graph-to-text generation aims to generate fluent texts from graph-based data. In this paper, we investigate two recently proposed pretrained language models (PLMs) and analyze the impact of different task-adaptive pretraining strategies for PLMs in graph-to-text generation. We present a study across three graph domains: meaning representations, Wikipedia knowledge graphs (KGs) and scientific KGs. We show that the PLMs BART and T5 achieve new state-of-the-art results and that task-adaptive pretraining strategies improve their performance even further. In particular, we report new state-of-the-art BLEU scores of 49.72 on LDC2017T10, 59.70 on WebNLG, and 25.66 on AGENDA datasets - a relative improvement of 31.8%, 4.5%, and 42.4%, respectively. In an extensive analysis, we identify possible reasons for the PLMs' success on graph-to-text tasks. We find evidence that their knowledge about true facts helps them perform well even when the input graph representation is reduced to a simple bag of node and edge labels.

Investigating Pretrained Language Models for Graph-to-Text Generation

Humans have been shown to give contrastive explanations, which explain why an observed event happened rather than some other counterfactual event (the contrast case). Despite the influential role that contrastivity plays in how humans explain, this property is largely missing from current methods for explaining NLP models. We present Minimal Contrastive Editing (MiCE), a method for producing contrastive explanations of model predictions in the form of edits to inputs that change model outputs to the contrast case. Our experiments across three tasks--binary sentiment classification, topic classification, and multiple-choice question answering--show that MiCE is able to produce edits that are not only contrastive, but also minimal and fluent, consistent with human contrastive edits. We demonstrate how MiCE edits can be used for two use cases in NLP system development--debugging incorrect model outputs and uncovering dataset artifacts--and thereby illustrate that producing contrastive explanations is a promising research direction for model interpretability.

Explaining NLP Models via Minimal Contrastive Editing (MiCE)

/pdf/explaining-nlp-models-via-minimal-contrastive-editing-mice-54n1bfu2bc.pdf

Contrastive explanations clarify why an event occurred in contrast to another. They are more inherently intuitive to humans to both produce and comprehend. We propose a methodology to produce contrastive explanations for classification models by modifying the representation to disregard non-contrastive information, and modifying model behavior to only be based on contrastive reasoning. Our method is based on projecting model representation to a latent space that captures only the features that are useful (to the model) to differentiate two potential decisions. We demonstrate the value of contrastive explanations by analyzing two different scenarios, using both high-level abstract concept attribution and low-level input token/span attribution, on two widely used text classification tasks. Specifically, we produce explanations for answering: for which label, and against which alternative label, is some aspect of the input useful? And which aspects of the input are useful for and against particular decisions? Overall, our findings shed light on the ability of label-contrastive explanations to provide a more accurate and finer-grained interpretability of a model's decision.

Contrastive Explanations for Model Interpretability

Graph-to-text generation aims to generate fluent texts from graph-based data. In this paper, we investigate two recent pretrained language models (PLMs) and analyze the impact of different task-adaptive pretraining strategies for PLMs in graph-to-text generation. We present a study across three graph domains: meaning representations, Wikipedia knowledge graphs (KGs) and scientific KGs. We show that approaches based on PLMs BART and T5 achieve new state-of-the-art results and that task-adaptive pretraining strategies improve their performance even further. We report new state-of-the-art BLEU scores of 49.72 on AMR-LDC2017T10, 59.70 on WebNLG, and 25.66 on AGENDA datasets - a relative improvement of 31.8%, 4.5%, and 42.4%, respectively, with our models generating significantly more fluent texts than human references. In an extensive analysis, we identify possible reasons for the PLMs’ success on graph-to-text tasks. Our findings suggest that the PLMs benefit from similar facts seen during pretraining or fine-tuning, such that they perform well even when the input graph is reduced to a simple bag of node and edge labels.

/pdf/promoting-graph-awareness-in-linearized-graph-to-text-1qee2nfdh1.pdf

Promoting Graph Awareness in Linearized Graph-to-Text Generation

/pdf/effective-attention-sheds-light-on-interpretability-z0gi6smau5.pdf

Ana Marasovi

Papers

Explaining NLP Models via Minimal Contrastive Editing (MiCE)

Promoting Graph Awareness in Linearized Graph-to-Text Generation

Effective Attention Sheds Light On Interpretability