WT5?! Training Text-to-Text Models to Explain their Predictions

Authors: Sharan Narang, Colin Raffel, Katherine Lee, Adam Roberts, Noah Fiedel, Karishma Malkan

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2004.14546v1

  • Comprehensive Summary
  • Key points
  • Layman's Summary
  • Blog article
In recent years, neural networks have made significant advancements in natural language processing (NLP) tasks, achieving human-level performance. However, understanding why these networks make specific predictions remains a challenge. In this paper titled "WT5?! Training Text-to-Text Models to Explain their Predictions," authors Sharan Narang, Colin Raffel, Katherine Lee, Adam Roberts, Noah Fiedel and Karishma Malkan propose a novel approach to address this issue. The authors leverage the text-to-text framework introduced by Raffel et al. in 2019 to train language models that not only generate predictions but also provide natural text explanations alongside them. Importantly, this method does not require any modifications to the loss function or training and decoding procedures. Instead, the model is trained to output an explanation after generating the prediction. The results of their study demonstrate that this approach achieves state-of-the-art performance on explainability benchmarks. Moreover, it enables learning from a limited set of labeled explanations and facilitates the transfer of rationalization abilities across different datasets. To promote reproducibility and further research in this area, the authors have made their code available for training these models. Overall, this paper presents an innovative solution to enhance the interpretability of neural network predictions in NLP tasks by training models to provide natural text explanations alongside their outputs.
AI-generated keywords: NLP Neural Networks Text-to-Text Framework Explainability Interpretability

AI-generated Key Points

  • Neural networks have made significant advancements in natural language processing (NLP) tasks, achieving human-level performance.
  • Understanding why these networks make specific predictions remains a challenge.
  • The paper titled "WT5?! Training Text-to-Text Models to Explain their Predictions" proposes a novel approach to address this issue.
  • The authors leverage the text-to-text framework introduced by Raffel et al. in 2019 to train language models that generate predictions and provide natural text explanations alongside them.
  • This method does not require modifications to the loss function or training and decoding procedures.
  • The model is trained to output an explanation after generating the prediction.
  • This approach achieves state-of-the-art performance on explainability benchmarks.
  • It enables learning from a limited set of labeled explanations and facilitates the transfer of rationalization abilities across different datasets.
  • The authors have made their code available for training these models to promote reproducibility and further research in this area.
  • Overall, this paper presents an innovative solution to enhance the interpretability of neural network predictions in NLP tasks.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Abstract: Neural networks have recently achieved human-level performance on various challenging natural language processing (NLP) tasks, but it is notoriously difficult to understand why a neural network produced a particular prediction. In this paper, we leverage the text-to-text framework proposed by Raffel et al.(2019) to train language models to output a natural text explanation alongside their prediction. Crucially, this requires no modifications to the loss function or training and decoding procedures -- we simply train the model to output the explanation after generating the (natural text) prediction. We show that this approach not only obtains state-of-the-art results on explainability benchmarks, but also permits learning from a limited set of labeled explanations and transferring rationalization abilities across datasets. To facilitate reproducibility and future work, we release our code use to train the models.

Submitted to arXiv on 30 Apr. 2020

Tools for this paper

Explain it differently 3 free rewrites left today
Export BibTeX · RIS (Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote) · Markdown (Notion, Obsidian) · Premium
Citation alerts Premium
Journal club Slides to present it Premium
For journalists Press kit and hype check Premium

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

Figures and plots

Ask about a figure by number or use its question button to request visual analysis. Up to two figures and four image panels per question. Values read from plots are approximate; check the original data.

AI assistant instructions?

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.