Compositional Generalization in Dependency Parsing
Emily Goodwin, Siva Reddy, Timothy J. O'Donnell, Dzmitry Bahdanau
Abstract
Compositionality— the ability to combine familiar units like words into novel phrases and sentences— has been the focus of intense interest in artificial intelligence in recent years. To test compositional generalization in semantic parsing, Keysers et al. (2020) introduced Compositional Freebase Queries (CFQ). This dataset maximizes the similarity between the test and train distributions over primitive units, like words, while maximizing the compound divergence: the dissimilarity between test and train distributions over larger structures, like phrases. Dependency parsing, however, lacks a compositional generalization benchmark. In this work, we introduce a gold-standard set of dependency parses for CFQ, and use this to analyze the behaviour of a state-of-the art dependency parser (Qi et al., 2020) on the CFQ dataset. We find that increasing compound divergence degrades dependency parsing performance, although not as dramatically as semantic parsing performance. Additionally, we find the performance of the dependency parser does not uniformly degrade relative to compound divergence, and the parser performs differently on different splits with the same compound divergence. We explore a number of hypotheses for what causes the non-uniform degradation in dependency parsing performance, and identify a number of syntactic structures that drive the dependency parser’s lower performance on the most challenging splits.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers2
- Systematic Generalization with Edge TransformersLeon Bergen, Timothy J. O'Donnell, Dzmitry BahdanauNeurIPS 2021 · 62 citations
- On Evaluating Multilingual Compositional Generalization with Translated DatasetsZi Wang, Daniel HershcovichACL 2023 · 2 citations
Builds on6
- Measuring Compositional Generalization: A Comprehensive Method on Realistic DataDaniel Keysers, Nathanael Schärli, Nathan Scales, Hylke Buisman et al.ICLR 2020 · 401 citations
- A Benchmark for Systematic Generalization in Grounded Language UnderstandingLaura Ruis, Jacob Andreas, Marco Baroni, Diane Bouchacourt et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 169 citations
- COGS: A Compositional Generalization Challenge Based on Semantic InterpretationNajoung Kim, Tal LinzenEMNLP 2020 · 149 citations
- Hierarchical Poset Decoding for Compositional Generalization in LanguageYinuo Guo, Zeqi Lin, Jian-Guang Lou, Dongmei ZhangNeurIPS 2020 · 34 citations
- *-CFQ: Analyzing the Scalability of Machine Learning on a Compositional TaskDmitry Tsarkov, Tibor Tihon, Nathan Scales, Nikola Momchev et al.AAAI 2021 · 10 citations
Related papers
- Laziness Is a Virtue When It Comes to Compositionality in Neural Semantic ParsingMaxwell Crouse, Pavan Kapanipathi, Subhajit Chaudhury, Tahira Naseem et al.ACL 2023 · 1 citation
- Finding needles in a haystack: Sampling Structurally-diverse Training Sets from Synthetic Data for Compositional GeneralizationInbar Oren, Jonathan Herzig, Jonathan BerantEMNLP 2021
- Span-based Semantic Parsing for Compositional GeneralizationJonathan Herzig, Jonathan BerantACL 2021
- Structural generalization in COGS: Supertagging is (almost) all you needAlban Petit, Caio F. Corro, François YvonEMNLP 2023
- Compositional Generalization and Natural Language Variation: Can a Semantic Parsing Approach Handle Both?Peter Shaw, Ming-Wei Chang, Panupong Pasupat, Kristina ToutanovaACL 2021
