ArticleAMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science2023
Context Variance Evaluation of Pretrained Language Models for Prompt-based Biomedical Knowledge Probing.
Article in AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- README: Bridging Medical Jargon and Lay Understanding for Patient Education through Data-Centric NLP.Findings of ACL. EMNLP. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · 2024Article
- SYNFAC-EDIT: Synthetic Imitation Edit Feedback for Factual Alignment in Clinical Summarization.Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · 2024Article
- Multi-label Few-shot ICD Coding as Autoregressive Generation with Prompt.Proceedings of the ... AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pretrained language models (PLMs) have motivated research on what kinds of knowledge these models learn. Fill-in-the-blanks problem (e.g., cloze tests) is a natural approach for gauging such knowledge. BioLAMA generates prompts for biomedical factual knowledge triples and uses the Top-k accuracy metric to evaluate different PLMs' knowledge. However, existing research has shown that such prompt-based knowledge probing methods can only probe a lower bound of knowledge. Many factors like prompt-based probing biases make the LAMA benchmark unreliable and unstable. This problem is more prominent in BioLAMA. The severe long-tailed distribution in vocabulary and large-N-M relation make the performance gap between LAMA and BioLAMA remain notable. To address these, we introduced context variance into the prompt generation and proposed a new rank-change-based evaluation metric. Different from the previous known-unknown evaluation criteria, we proposed the concept of "Misunderstand" in LAMA for the first time. Through experiments on 12 PLMs, we showed that our context variance prompts and Understand-Confuse-Misunderstand (UCM) metric make BioLAMA more friendly to large-N-M relations and rare relations. We also conducted a set of control experiments to disentangle "understand" from just "read and copy".
Identifiers
37350903PMC10283095What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.