Paper detail

Benchmarking Popular Classification Models' Robustness to Random and Targeted Corruptions

Text classification models, especially neural networks based models, have reached very high accuracy on many popular benchmark datasets. Yet, such models when deployed in real world applications, tend to perform badly. The primary reason is that these models are not tested against sufficient real world natural data. Based on the application users, the vocabulary and the style of the model's input may greatly vary. This emphasizes the need for a model agnostic test dataset, which consists of various corruptions that are natural to appear in the wild. Models trained and tested on such benchmark datasets, will be more robust against real world data. However, such data sets are not easily available. In this work, we address this problem, by extending the benchmark datasets along naturally occurring corruptions such as Spelling Errors, Text Noise and Synonyms and making them publicly available. Through extensive experiments, we compare random and targeted corruption strategies using Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations(LIME). We report the vulnerabilities in two popular text classification models along these corruptions and also find that targeted corruptions can expose vulnerabilities of a model better than random choices in most cases.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.