Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Do CoNLL-2003 Named Entity Taggers Still Work Well in 2023?

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 2212.09747 v2 pith:U3NRK4GL submitted 2022-12-19 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords datamodelsconll-2003testgeneralizationwelldifferententity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

The CoNLL-2003 English named entity recognition (NER) dataset has been widely used to train and evaluate NER models for almost 20 years. However, it is unclear how well models that are trained on this 20-year-old data and developed over a period of decades using the same test set will perform when applied on modern data. In this paper, we evaluate the generalization of over 20 different models trained on CoNLL-2003, and show that NER models have very different generalization. Surprisingly, we find no evidence of performance degradation in pre-trained Transformers, such as RoBERTa and T5, even when fine-tuned using decades-old data. We investigate why some models generalize well to new data while others do not, and attempt to disentangle the effects of temporal drift and overfitting due to test reuse. Our analysis suggests that most deterioration is due to temporal mismatch between the pre-training corpora and the downstream test sets. We found that four factors are important for good generalization: model architecture, number of parameters, time period of the pre-training corpus, in addition to the amount of fine-tuning data. We suggest current evaluation methods have, in some sense, underestimated progress on NER over the past 20 years, as NER models have not only improved on the original CoNLL-2003 test set, but improved even more on modern data. Our datasets can be found at https://github.com/ShuhengL/acl2023_conllpp.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Unraveling Media Perspectives: A Comprehensive Methodology Combining Large Language Models, Topic Modeling, Sentiment Analysis, and Ontology Learning to Analyse Media Bias

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A comparative media-bias pipeline on 37 news outlets using hierarchical topics, sentiment, entities, and LLM ontologies was tested, with clear signals from titles and entities but failures in body sentiment and larger...

Pith tools