Two papers from DFKI-NLP authors have been accepted for publication at EMNLP 2022, the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. The conference is planned to be a hybrid meeting and will take place in Abu Dhabi, from Dec 7th to Dec 11th, 2022.

One paper from DFKI-NLP authors has been accepted for publication at the Workshop on Information Extraction from Scientific Publications (WIESP). The workshop will be held at AACL-IJCNLP 2022, the 2nd Conference of the Asia-Pacific Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 12th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, which will take place as an online-only event from Nov.

One paper from DFKI-NLP authors has been accepted for publication at JCDL 2022, the 22nd ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries. The conference is planned to be a hybrid meeting and will take place in Cologne, Germany, from June 20th through June 24th, 2022.

Six papers from DFKI-NLP authors have been accepted for publication at LREC 2022, the 13th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference. The conference is planned to be a hybrid meeting and will take place in Marseille, France, from June 20th through June 25th, 2022.

Four papers from DFKI-NLP authors have been accepted for publication at ACL 2022, the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. The conference is planned to be a hybrid meeting and will take place in Dublin, Ireland, from May 22nd through May 27th, 2022.

Prompting pre-trained language models has achieved impressive performance on various NLP tasks, especially in low data regimes. Despite the success of prompting in monolingual settings, applying prompt-based methods in multilingual scenarios has been limited to a narrow set of tasks, due to the high cost of handcrafting multilingual prompts. In this paper, we present the first work on prompt-based multilingual relation classification (RC), by introducing an efficient and effective method that constructs prompts from relation triples and involves only minimal translation for the class labels. We evaluate its performance in fully supervised, few-shot and zero-shot scenarios, and analyze its effectiveness across 14 languages, prompt variants, and English-task training in cross-lingual settings. We find that in both fully supervised and few-shot scenarios, our prompt method beats competitive baselines: fine-tuning XLM-R-EM and null prompts. It also outperforms the random baseline by a large margin in zero-shot experiments. Our method requires little in-language knowledge and can be used as a strong baseline for similar multilingual classification tasks.

Scholarly Argumentation Mining (SAM) has recently gained attention due to its potential to help scholars with the rapid growth of published scientific literature. It comprises two subtasks: argumentative discourse unit recognition (ADUR) and argumentative relation extraction (ARE), both of which are challenging since they require e.g. the integration of domain knowledge, the detection of implicit statements, and the disambiguation of argument structure. While previous work focused on dataset construction and baseline methods for specific document sections, such as abstract or results, full-text scholarly argumentation mining has seen little progress. In this work, we introduce a sequential pipeline model combining ADUR and ARE for full-text SAM, and provide a first analysis of the performance of pretrained language models (PLMs) on both subtasks. We establish a new SotA for ADUR on the Sci-Arg corpus, outperforming the previous best reported result by a large margin (+7% F1). We also present the first results for ARE, and thus for the full AM pipeline, on this benchmark dataset. Our detailed error analysis reveals that non-contiguous ADUs as well as the interpretation of discourse connectors pose major challenges and that data annotation needs to be more consistent.

Learning scientific document representations can be substantially improved through contrastive learning objectives, where the challenge lies in creating positive and negative training samples that encode the desired similarity semantics. Prior work relies on discrete citation relations to generate contrast samples. However, discrete citations enforce a hard cut-off to similarity. This is counter-intuitive to similarity-based learning, and ignores that scientific papers can be very similar despite lacking a direct citation - a core problem of finding related research. Instead, we use controlled nearest neighbor sampling over citation graph embeddings for contrastive learning. This control allows us to learn continuous similarity, to sample hard-to-learn negatives and positives, and also to avoid collisions between negative and positive samples by controlling the sampling margin between them. The resulting method SciNCL outperforms the state-of-the-art on the SciDocs benchmark. Furthermore, we demonstrate that it can train (or tune) models sample-efficiently, and that it can be combined with recent training-efficient methods. Perhaps surprisingly, even training a general-domain language model this way outperforms baselines pretrained in-domain.

This paper presents a fine-grained test suite for the language pair German–English. The test suite is based on a number of linguistically motivated categories and phenomena and the semi-automatic evaluation is carried out with regular expressions. We describe the creation and implementation of the test suite in detail, providing a full list of all categories and phenomena. Furthermore, we present various exemplary applications of our test suite that have been implemented in the past years, like contributions to the Conference of Machine Translation, the usage of the test suite and MT outputs for quality estimation, and the expansion of the test suite to the language pair Portuguese–English. We describe how we tracked the development of the performance of various systems MT systems over the years with the help of the test suite and which categories and phenomena are prone to resulting in MT errors. For the first time, we also make a large part of our test suite publicly available to the research community.

In recent years, machine learning for clinical decision support has gained more and more attention. In order to introduce such applications into clinical practice, a good performance might be essential, however, the aspect of trust should not be underestimated. For the treating physician using such a system and being (legally) responsible for the decision made, it is particularly important to understand the system’s recommendation. To provide insights into a model’s decision, various techniques from the field of explainability (XAI) have been proposed whose output is often enough not targeted to the domain experts that want to use the model. To close this gap, in this work, we explore how explanations could possibly look like in future. To this end, this work presents a dataset of textual explanations in context of decision support. Within a reader study, human physicians estimated the likelihood of possible negative patient outcomes in the near future and justified each decision with a few sentences. Using those sentences, we created a novel corpus, annotated with different semantic layers. Moreover, we provide an analysis of how those explanations are constructed, and how they change depending on physician, on the estimated risk and also in comparison to an automatic clinical decision support system with feature importance.