BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Vinit Ravishankar

Vinit Ravishankar contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computation and LanguageMachine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
6works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

6 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

A Systematic Comparison of Architectures for Document-Level Sentiment Classification

Documents are composed of smaller pieces - paragraphs, sentences, and tokens - that have complex relationships between one another. Sentiment classification models that take into account the structure inherent in these documents have a theoretical advantage over those that do not. At the same time, transfer learning models based on language model pretraining have shown promise for document classification. However, these two paradigms have not been systematically compared and it is not clear under which circumstances one approach is better than the other. In this work we empirically compare hierarchical models and transfer learning for document-level sentiment classification. We show that non-trivial hierarchical models outperform previous baselines and transfer learning on document-level sentiment classification in five languages.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Word Order Does Matter (And Shuffled Language Models Know It)

Recent studies have shown that language models pretrained and/or fine-tuned on randomly permuted sentences exhibit competitive performance on GLUE, putting into question the importance of word order information. Somewhat counter-intuitively, some of these studies also report that position embeddings appear to be crucial for models' good performance with shuffled text. We probe these language models for word order information and investigate what position embeddings learned from shuffled text encode, showing that these models retain information pertaining to the original, naturalistic word order. We show this is in part due to a subtlety in how shuffling is implemented in previous work -- before rather than after subword segmentation. Surprisingly, we find even Language models trained on text shuffled after subword segmentation retain some semblance of information about word order because of the statistical dependencies between sentence length and unigram probabilities. Finally, we show that beyond GLUE, a variety of language understanding tasks do require word order information, often to an extent that cannot be learned through fine-tuning.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Attention Can Reflect Syntactic Structure (If You Let It)

Since the popularization of the Transformer as a general-purpose feature encoder for NLP, many studies have attempted to decode linguistic structure from its novel multi-head attention mechanism. However, much of such work focused almost exclusively on English -- a language with rigid word order and a lack of inflectional morphology. In this study, we present decoding experiments for multilingual BERT across 18 languages in order to test the generalizability of the claim that dependency syntax is reflected in attention patterns. We show that full trees can be decoded above baseline accuracy from single attention heads, and that individual relations are often tracked by the same heads across languages. Furthermore, in an attempt to address recent debates about the status of attention as an explanatory mechanism, we experiment with fine-tuning mBERT on a supervised parsing objective while freezing different series of parameters. Interestingly, in steering the objective to learn explicit linguistic structure, we find much of the same structure represented in the resulting attention patterns, with interesting differences with respect to which parameters are frozen.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Do Neural Language Models Show Preferences for Syntactic Formalisms?

Recent work on the interpretability of deep neural language models has concluded that many properties of natural language syntax are encoded in their representational spaces. However, such studies often suffer from limited scope by focusing on a single language and a single linguistic formalism. In this study, we aim to investigate the extent to which the semblance of syntactic structure captured by language models adheres to a surface-syntactic or deep syntactic style of analysis, and whether the patterns are consistent across different languages. We apply a probe for extracting directed dependency trees to BERT and ELMo models trained on 13 different languages, probing for two different syntactic annotation styles: Universal Dependencies (UD), prioritizing deep syntactic relations, and Surface-Syntactic Universal Dependencies (SUD), focusing on surface structure. We find that both models exhibit a preference for UD over SUD - with interesting variations across languages and layers - and that the strength of this preference is correlated with differences in tree shape.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

From Zero to Hero: On the Limitations of Zero-Shot Cross-Lingual Transfer with Multilingual Transformers

Massively multilingual transformers pretrained with language modeling objectives (e.g., mBERT, XLM-R) have become a de facto default transfer paradigm for zero-shot cross-lingual transfer in NLP, offering unmatched transfer performance. Current downstream evaluations, however, verify their efficacy predominantly in transfer settings involving languages with sufficient amounts of pretraining data, and with lexically and typologically close languages. In this work, we analyze their limitations and show that cross-lingual transfer via massively multilingual transformers, much like transfer via cross-lingual word embeddings, is substantially less effective in resource-lean scenarios and for distant languages. Our experiments, encompassing three lower-level tasks (POS tagging, dependency parsing, NER), as well as two high-level semantic tasks (NLI, QA), empirically correlate transfer performance with linguistic similarity between the source and target languages, but also with the size of pretraining corpora of target languages. We also demonstrate a surprising effectiveness of inexpensive few-shot transfer (i.e., fine-tuning on a few target-language instances after fine-tuning in the source) across the board. This suggests that additional research efforts should be invested to reach beyond the limiting zero-shot conditions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

The Sensitivity of Language Models and Humans to Winograd Schema Perturbations

Large-scale pretrained language models are the major driving force behind recent improvements in performance on the Winograd Schema Challenge, a widely employed test of common sense reasoning ability. We show, however, with a new diagnostic dataset, that these models are sensitive to linguistic perturbations of the Winograd examples that minimally affect human understanding. Our results highlight interesting differences between humans and language models: language models are more sensitive to number or gender alternations and synonym replacements than humans, and humans are more stable and consistent in their predictions, maintain a much higher absolute performance, and perform better on non-associative instances than associative ones. Overall, humans are correct more often than out-of-the-box models, and the models are sometimes right for the wrong reasons. Finally, we show that fine-tuning on a large, task-specific dataset can offer a solution to these issues.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access