TY - GEN
T1 - Comparing test sets with item response theory
AU - Vania, Clara
AU - Htut, Phu Mon
AU - Huang, William
AU - Mungra, Dhara
AU - Pang, Richard Yuanzhe
AU - Phang, Jason
AU - Liu, Haokun
AU - Cho, Kyunghyun
AU - Bowman, Samuel R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Association for Computational Linguistics
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Recent years have seen numerous NLP datasets introduced to evaluate the performance of fine-tuned models on natural language understanding tasks. Recent results from large pretrained models, though, show that many of these datasets are largely saturated and unlikely to be able to detect further progress. What kind of datasets are still effective at discriminating among strong models, and what kind of datasets should we expect to be able to detect future improvements? To measure this uniformly across datasets, we draw on Item Response Theory and evaluate 29 datasets using predictions from 18 pretrained Transformer models on individual test examples. We find that Quoref, HellaSwag, and MC-TACO are best suited for distinguishing among state-of-the-art models, while SNLI, MNLI, and CommitmentBank seem to be saturated for current strong models. We also observe span selection task format, which is used for QA datasets like QAMR or SQuAD2.0, is effective in differentiating between strong and weak models.
AB - Recent years have seen numerous NLP datasets introduced to evaluate the performance of fine-tuned models on natural language understanding tasks. Recent results from large pretrained models, though, show that many of these datasets are largely saturated and unlikely to be able to detect further progress. What kind of datasets are still effective at discriminating among strong models, and what kind of datasets should we expect to be able to detect future improvements? To measure this uniformly across datasets, we draw on Item Response Theory and evaluate 29 datasets using predictions from 18 pretrained Transformer models on individual test examples. We find that Quoref, HellaSwag, and MC-TACO are best suited for distinguishing among state-of-the-art models, while SNLI, MNLI, and CommitmentBank seem to be saturated for current strong models. We also observe span selection task format, which is used for QA datasets like QAMR or SQuAD2.0, is effective in differentiating between strong and weak models.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85108819550&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85108819550&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85108819550
T3 - ACL-IJCNLP 2021 - 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, Proceedings of the Conference
SP - 1141
EP - 1158
BT - ACL-IJCNLP 2021 - 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, Proceedings of the Conference
PB - Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL)
T2 - Joint Conference of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, ACL-IJCNLP 2021
Y2 - 1 August 2021 through 6 August 2021
ER -