When and how to paraphrase for named entity recognition?
Saket Sharma, Aviral Joshi, Yiyun Zhao, Namrata Mukhija, Hanoz Bhathena, Prateek Singh, Sashank Santhanam
Abstract
While paraphrasing is a promising approach for data augmentation in classification tasks, its effect on named entity recognition (NER) is not investigated systematically due to the difficulty of span-level label preservation. In this paper, we utilize simple strategies to annotate entity spans in generations and compare established and novel methods of paraphrasing in NLP such as back translation, specialized encoderdecoder models such as Pegasus, and GPT-3 variants for their effectiveness in improving downstream performance for NER across different levels of gold annotations and paraphrasing strength on 5 datasets. We thoroughly explore the influence of paraphrasers, dynamics between paraphrasing strength and gold dataset size on the NER performance with visualizations and statistical testing. We find that the choice of the paraphraser greatly impacts NER performance, with one of the larger GPT-3 variants exceedingly capable of generating high quality paraphrases, yielding statistically significant improvements in NER performance with increasing paraphrasing strength, while other paraphrasers show more mixed results. Additionally, inline auto annotations generated by larger GPT-3 are strictly better than heuristic based annotations. We also find diminishing benefits of paraphrasing as gold annotations increase for most datasets. Furthermore, while most paraphrasers promote entity memorization in NER, the proposed GPT-3 configuration performs most favorably among the compared paraphrasers when tested on unseen entities, with memorization reducing further with paraphrasing strength. Finally, we explore mention replacement using GPT-3, which provides additional benefits over base paraphrasing for specific datasets.
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.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext e84ed438-269c-4b86-a5eb-738f45ebd3aaCited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on11
- Language Models are Few-Shot LearnersTom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 64,255 citations
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Finetuned Language Models are Zero-Shot LearnersJason Wei, Maarten Bosma, Vincent Y. Zhao, Kelvin Guu et al.ICLR 2022 · 4,966 citations
- Unsupervised Data Augmentation for Consistency TrainingQizhe Xie, Zihang Dai, Eduard H. Hovy, Thang Luong et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 2,774 citations
- PEGASUS: Pre-training with Extracted Gap-sentences for Abstractive SummarizationJingqing Zhang, Yao Zhao, Mohammad Saleh, Peter J. LiuICML 2020 · 2,453 citations
Related papers
- De-Bias for Generative Extraction in Unified NER TaskShuai Zhang, Yongliang Shen, Zeqi Tan, Yiquan Wu et al.ACL 2022 · 59 citations
- Unifying Discrete and Continuous Representations for Unsupervised Paraphrase GenerationMingfeng Xue, Dayiheng Liu, Wenqiang Lei, Jie Fu et al.EMNLP 2023 · 2 citations
- Paraphrasing as Zero-shot Translation with Feature-guided Diversity EnhancementZiyue Yan, Hongying Zan, Xinglin Lyu, Hongfei XuACL 2026
- Small Language Model Makes an Effective Long Text ExtractorYelin Chen, Fanjin Zhang, Jie TangAAAI 2025 · 1 citation
- LUKE: Deep Contextualized Entity Representations with Entity-aware Self-attentionIkuya Yamada, Akari Asai, Hiroyuki Shindo, Hideaki Takeda et al.EMNLP 2020 · 562 citations
