State-of-the-art NLP models can adopt shallow heuristics that limit their generalization capability (McCoy et al., 2019).Such heuristics include lexical overlap with the training set in Named-Entity Recognition (Taillé et al., 2020a) and Event or Type heuristics in Relation Extraction (Rosenman et al., 2020).In the more realistic end-to-end RE setting, we can expect yet another heuristic: the mere retention of training relation triples.In this paper we propose several experiments confirming that retention of known facts is a key factor of performance on standard benchmarks.Furthermore, one experiment suggests that a pipeline model able to use intermediate type representations is less prone to over-rely on retention.

Contextualized embeddings use unsupervised language model pretraining to compute word representations depending on their context. This is intuitively useful for generalization, especially in Named-Entity Recognition where it is crucial to detect mentions never seen during training. However, standard English benchmarks overestimate the importance of lexical over contextual features because of an unrealistic lexical overlap between train and test mentions. In this paper, we perform an empirical analysis of the generalization capabilities of state-of-the-art contextualized embeddings by separating mentions by novelty and with out-of-domain evaluation. We show that they are particularly beneficial for unseen mentions detection, especially out-of-domain. For models trained on CoNLL03, language model contextualization leads to a +1.2% maximal relative micro-F1 score increase in-domain against +13% out-of-domain on the WNUT dataset (The code is available at https://github.com/btaille/contener ).

Despite efforts to distinguish three different evaluation setups (Bekoulis et al., 2018), numerous end-to-end Relation Extraction (RE) articles present unreliable performance comparison to previous work. In this paper, we first identify several patterns of invalid comparisons in published papers and describe them to avoid their propagation. We then propose a small empirical study to quantify the impact of the most common mistake and evaluate it leads to overestimating the final RE performance by around 5% on ACE05. We also seize this opportunity to study the unexplored ablations of two recent developments: the use of language model pretraining (specifically BERT) and span-level NER. This meta-analysis emphasizes the need for rigor in the report of both the evaluation setting and the datasets statistics and we call for unifying the evaluation setting in end-to-end RE.