What Does My QA Model Know? Devising Controlled Probes using Expert Knowledge
Open-domain question answering (QA) is known to involve several underlying knowledge and reasoning challenges, but are models actually learning such knowledge when trained on benchmark tasks? To investigate this, we introduce several new challenge tasks that probe whether state-of-the-art QA models have general knowledge about word definitions and general taxonomic reasoning, both of which are fundamental to more complex forms of reasoning and are widespread in benchmark datasets. As an alternative to expensive crowd-sourcing, we introduce a methodology for automatically building datasets from various types of expert knowledge (e.g., knowledge graphs and lexical taxonomies), allowing for systematic control over the resulting probes and for a more comprehensive evaluation. We find automatically constructing probes to be vulnerable to annotation artifacts, which we carefully control for. Our evaluation confirms that transformer-based QA models are already predisposed to recognize certain types of structural lexical knowledge. However, it also reveals a more nuanced picture: their performance degrades substantially with even a slight increase in the number of hops in the underlying taxonomic hierarchy, or as more challenging distractor candidate answers are introduced. Further, even when these models succeed at the standard instance-level evaluation, they leave much room for improvement when assessed at the level of clusters of semantically connected probes (e.g., all Isa questions about a concept).
Code (2)
Tasks
General KnowledgeKnowledge GraphsOpen-Domain Question AnsweringQuestion AnsweringSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
What Does Loss Optimization Actually Teach, If Anything? Knowledge Dynamics in Continual Pre-training of LLMs
Continual Pre-Training (CPT) is widely used for acquiring and updating factual knowledge in LLMs. This practice treats loss as a proxy for knowledge learning, while offering no grounding into how it changes during traini…
MemTrace: Probing What Final Accuracy Misses in Long-Term Memory
LLM agents increasingly maintain long-term memory of user facts across sessions. Yet such memory is usually evaluated by aggregating accuracy over question rows or episodes. Because this approach scores question rows ind…
Procedural Memory Under Change: Reuse and Interference in Controlled Web Tasks
Procedural memory lets language agents reuse successful routines, but reuse presumes that a stored routine remains applicable. We study what happens when that presumption is deliberately violated. The study combines a re…
Predicting Reference: What do Language Models Learn about Discourse Models?
Whereas there is a growing literature that probes neural language models to assess the degree to which they have latently acquired grammatical knowledge, little if any research has investigated their acquisition of disco…
Do Syntactic Probes Probe Syntax? Experiments with Jabberwocky Probing
Analysing whether neural language models encode linguistic information has become popular in NLP. One method of doing so, which is frequently cited to support the claim that models like BERT encode syntax, is called prob…