Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Domain Divergences: a Survey and Empirical Analysis

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 2010.12198 v2 pith:MQYG57IU submitted 2020-10-23 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords measuresdivergencedomainhigher-orderliteratureanalysisappropriatechoose
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Domain divergence plays a significant role in estimating the performance of a model in new domains. While there is a significant literature on divergence measures, researchers find it hard to choose an appropriate divergence for a given NLP application. We address this shortcoming by both surveying the literature and through an empirical study. We develop a taxonomy of divergence measures consisting of three classes -- Information-theoretic, Geometric, and Higher-order measures and identify the relationships between them. Further, to understand the common use-cases of these measures, we recognise three novel applications -- 1) Data Selection, 2) Learning Representation, and 3) Decisions in the Wild -- and use it to organise our literature. From this, we identify that Information-theoretic measures are prevalent for 1) and 3), and Higher-order measures are more common for 2). To further help researchers choose appropriate measures to predict drop in performance -- an important aspect of Decisions in the Wild, we perform correlation analysis spanning 130 domain adaptation scenarios, 3 varied NLP tasks and 12 divergence measures identified from our survey. To calculate these divergences, we consider the current contextual word representations (CWR) and contrast with the older distributed representations. We find that traditional measures over word distributions still serve as strong baselines, while higher-order measures with CWR are effective.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Label Unification for Cross-Dataset Generalization in Cybersecurity NER

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Label unification across four cybersecurity NER datasets does not improve cross-dataset generalization, and the LST-NER graph matching model offers no gain over BERT-base-NER.

Pith tools