{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2021:3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB","short_pith_number":"pith:3BXXV6Z3","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"d86f7afb3bf20f9bcf068ea95937b42078d741c755761cf4a8f2bde3a00f0d51","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2106.07349","version":2},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Using Integrated Gradients and Constituency Parse Trees to explain Linguistic Acceptability learnt by BERT","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.CL","authors_text":"Anmol Nayak, Hari Prasad Timmapathini","submitted_at":"2021-06-01T15:17:45Z","abstract_excerpt":"Linguistic Acceptability is the task of determining whether a sentence is grammatical or ungrammatical. It has applications in several use cases like Question-Answering, Natural Language Generation, Neural Machine Translation, where grammatical correctness is crucial. In this paper we aim to understand the decision-making process of BERT (Devlin et al., 2019) in distinguishing between Linguistically Acceptable sentences (LA) and Linguistically Unacceptable sentences (LUA). We leverage Layer Integrated Gradients Attribution Scores (LIG) to explain the Linguistic Acceptability criteria that are "},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2106.07349","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"metadata":{"license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","primary_cat":"cs.CL","submitted_at":"2021-06-01T15:17:45Z","cross_cats_sorted":[],"title_canon_sha256":"d9528af56babf84a264a5804b9b510eed393d6c6cdbc30ab0628f6dfe7224360","abstract_canon_sha256":"0322783ee850a5ee60dc7b71e8dee8e2baedc17af784a4a9cefa78ce43f33534"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T04:02:54.300041Z","signature_b64":"NmLT8jQan2nWlCmnSh8VzG3A42L2/RzeWe0q2Ij4tYLrLYtJwPu+53Dd0bGva7BDVKl3+tOWtL3og4xpETeLBA==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"d86f7afb3bf20f9bcf068ea95937b42078d741c755761cf4a8f2bde3a00f0d51","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T04:02:54.299515Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T04:02:54.299515Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Using Integrated Gradients and Constituency Parse Trees to explain Linguistic Acceptability learnt by BERT","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.CL","authors_text":"Anmol Nayak, Hari Prasad Timmapathini","submitted_at":"2021-06-01T15:17:45Z","abstract_excerpt":"Linguistic Acceptability is the task of determining whether a sentence is grammatical or ungrammatical. It has applications in several use cases like Question-Answering, Natural Language Generation, Neural Machine Translation, where grammatical correctness is crucial. In this paper we aim to understand the decision-making process of BERT (Devlin et al., 2019) in distinguishing between Linguistically Acceptable sentences (LA) and Linguistically Unacceptable sentences (LUA). We leverage Layer Integrated Gradients Attribution Scores (LIG) to explain the Linguistic Acceptability criteria that are "},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2106.07349","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2106.07349/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2106.07349","created_at":"2026-07-05T04:02:54.299573+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2106.07349v2","created_at":"2026-07-05T04:02:54.299573+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2106.07349","created_at":"2026-07-05T04:02:54.299573+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"3BXXV6Z36IHZ","created_at":"2026-07-05T04:02:54.299573+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYG","created_at":"2026-07-05T04:02:54.299573+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"3BXXV6Z3","created_at":"2026-07-05T04:02:54.299573+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":1,"internal_anchor_count":1,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2505.16868","citing_title":"Comparative analysis of subword tokenization approaches for Indian languages","ref_index":33,"is_internal_anchor":true}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB","json":"https://pith.science/pith/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/3BXXV6Z3"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/3BXXV6Z3","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2106.07349&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/3BXXV6Z36IHZXTYGR2UVSN5UEB/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T04:02:54.299573+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T04:02:54.299573+00:00"}