Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Rethinking Cooperative Rationalization: Introspective Extraction and Complement Control

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 1910.13294 v2 pith:CXBT6OBZ submitted 2019-10-29 cs.CL cs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.LG
keywords selectioncontrolfeaturesco-operativecomplementexplicitlygeneratorinformation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Selective rationalization has become a common mechanism to ensure that predictive models reveal how they use any available features. The selection may be soft or hard, and identifies a subset of input features relevant for prediction. The setup can be viewed as a co-operate game between the selector (aka rationale generator) and the predictor making use of only the selected features. The co-operative setting may, however, be compromised for two reasons. First, the generator typically has no direct access to the outcome it aims to justify, resulting in poor performance. Second, there's typically no control exerted on the information left outside the selection. We revise the overall co-operative framework to address these challenges. We introduce an introspective model which explicitly predicts and incorporates the outcome into the selection process. Moreover, we explicitly control the rationale complement via an adversary so as not to leave any useful information out of the selection. We show that the two complementary mechanisms maintain both high predictive accuracy and lead to comprehensive rationales.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Training Large Language Models for Self-Explanation Faithfulness

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RL fine-tuning with a counterfactual mention/influence reward raises LLM self-explanation faithfulness (Phi-CCT) from near zero to ~0.66 in-distribution for two 8B models, with partial transfer to held-out tasks.

  2. Can human clinical rationales improve the performance and explainability of clinical text classification models?

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Adding 96,679 human rationale highlights improves cancer-site classification less than adding the same number of full pathology reports, and the explainability gain is small.

Pith tools