Pith. sign in

REVIEW

A Critical Analysis of Biased Parsers in Unsupervised Parsing

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1909.09428 v1 pith:CFVBWKAI submitted 2019-09-20 cs.CL cs.LG

A Critical Analysis of Biased Parsers in Unsupervised Parsing

classification cs.CL cs.LG
keywords languageparsinganalysisalgorithmbiasedmodelsproxiesrecover
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

A series of recent papers has used a parsing algorithm due to Shen et al. (2018) to recover phrase-structure trees based on proxies for "syntactic depth." These proxy depths are obtained from the representations learned by recurrent language models augmented with mechanisms that encourage the (unsupervised) discovery of hierarchical structure latent in natural language sentences. Using the same parser, we show that proxies derived from a conventional LSTM language model produce trees comparably well to the specialized architectures used in previous work. However, we also provide a detailed analysis of the parsing algorithm, showing (1) that it is incomplete---that is, it can recover only a fraction of possible trees---and (2) that it has a marked bias for right-branching structures which results in inflated performance in right-branching languages like English. Our analysis shows that evaluating with biased parsing algorithms can inflate the apparent structural competence of language models.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.