Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Saliha Muradoglu

dblp:268/2338 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Efficient and distributed learning · 39% Information extraction and text analysis · 30% Language models and text generation · 30%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
data selection
0.612022
Eeny, meeny, miny, moe. How to choose data for morphological inflection · EMNLP 2022
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
low-resource language processing
0.612022
Eeny, meeny, miny, moe. How to choose data for morphological inflection · EMNLP 2022
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › computational morphology
morphological inflection
0.612022
Eeny, meeny, miny, moe. How to choose data for morphological inflection · EMNLP 2022
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
data-efficient learning
0.212022
Eeny, meeny, miny, moe. How to choose data for morphological inflection · EMNLP 2022

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

transformer · 0.6entropy-based sampling · 0.6confidence-based sampling · 0.6active learning · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Eeny, meeny, miny, moe. How to choose data for morphological inflection
abstract
Data scarcity is a widespread problem in numerous natural language processing (NLP) tasks for low-resource languages.Within morphology, the labour-intensive work of tagging/glossing data is a serious bottleneck for both NLP and language documentation.Active learning (AL) aims to reduce the cost of data annotation by selecting data that is most informative for improving the model.In this paper, we explore four sampling strategies for the task of morphological inflection using a Transformer model: a pair of oracle experiments where data is chosen based on whether the model already can or cannot inflect the test forms correctly, as well as strategies based on high/low model confidence, entropy, as well as random selection.We investigate the robustness of each strategy across 30 typologically diverse languages.We also perform a more in-depth case study of Natügu.Our results show a clear benefit to selecting data based on model confidence and entropy.Unsurprisingly, the oracle experiment, where only incorrectly handled forms are chosen for further training, which is presented as a proxy for linguist/language consultant feedback, shows the most improvement.This is followed closely by choosing low-confidence and high-entropy predictions.We also show that despite the conventional wisdom of larger data sets yielding better accuracy, introducing more instances of high-confidence or low-entropy forms, or forms that the model can already inflect correctly, can reduce model performance.
Saliha Muradoglu, Mans Hulden
EMNLP1