Identifying effective interventions from the scientific literature is challenging due to the high volume of publications, specialized terminology, and inconsistent reporting formats, making manual curation laborious and prone to oversight. To address this challenge, this paper proposes a novel framework leveraging large language models (LLMs), which integrates a progressive ontology prompting (POP) algorithm with a dual-agent system, named LLM-Duo. On the one hand, the POP algorithm conducts a prioritized breadth-first search (BFS) across a predefined ontology, generating structured prompt templates and action sequences to guide the automatic annotation process. On the other hand, the LLM-Duo system features two specialized LLM agents, an explorer and an evaluator, working collaboratively and adversarially to continuously refine annotation quality. We showcase the real-world applicability of our framework through a case study focused on speech-language intervention discovery. Experimental results show that our approach surpasses advanced baselines, achieving more accurate and comprehensive annotations through a fully automated process. Our approach successfully identified 2,421 interventions from a corpus of 64,177 research articles in the speech-language pathology domain, culminating in the creation of a publicly accessible intervention knowledge base with great potential to benefit the speech-language pathology community.

Several works have proven that finetuning is an applicable approach for debiasing contextualized word embeddings. Similarly, discrete prompts with semantic meanings have shown to be effective in debiasing tasks. With unfixed mathematical representation at the token level, continuous prompts usually surpass discrete ones at providing a pre-trained language model (PLM) with additional task-specific information. Despite this, relatively few efforts have been made to debias PLMs by prompt tuning with continuous prompts compared to its discrete counterpart. Furthermore, for most debiasing methods that alter a PLM's original parameters, a major problem is the need to not only decrease the bias in the PLM but also to ensure that the PLM does not lose its representation ability. Finetuning methods typically have a hard time maintaining this balance, as they tend to violently remove meanings of attribute words (like the words developing our concepts of "male" and "female" for gender), which also leads to an unstable and unpredictable training process. In this paper, we propose ADEPT, a method to debias PLMs using prompt tuning while maintaining the delicate balance between removing biases and ensuring representation ability. To achieve this, we propose a new training criterion inspired by manifold learning and equip it with an explicit debiasing term to optimize prompt tuning. In addition, we conduct several experiments with regard to the reliability, quality, and quantity of a previously proposed attribute training corpus in order to obtain a clearer prototype of a certain attribute, which indicates the attribute's position and relative distances to other words on the manifold. We evaluate ADEPT on several widely acknowledged debiasing benchmarks and downstream tasks, and find that it achieves competitive results while maintaining (and in some cases even improving) the PLM's representation ability. We further visualize words' correlation before and after debiasing a PLM, and give some possible explanations for the visible effects.

Ali Omrani, Alireza Salkhordeh Ziabari, Charles Yu, Preni Golazizian, Brendan Kennedy, Mohammad Atari, Heng Ji, Morteza Dehghani. Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2023.

Neural language models learn, to varying degrees of accuracy, the grammatical properties of natural languages.In this work, we investigate whether there are systematic sources of variation in the language models' accuracy.Focusing on subject-verb agreement and reflexive anaphora, we find that certain nouns are systematically understood better than others, an effect which is robust across grammatical tasks and different language models.Surprisingly, we find that across four orders of magnitude, corpus frequency is unrelated to a noun's performance on grammatical tasks.Finally, we find that a novel noun's grammatical properties can be few-shot learned from various types of training data.The results present a paradox: there should be less variation in grammatical performance than is actually observed.