Assessing the quality of information extraction
2404.04068
0
0
Abstract
Advances in large language models have notably enhanced the efficiency of information extraction from unstructured and semi-structured data sources. As these technologies become integral to various applications, establishing an objective measure for the quality of information extraction becomes imperative. However, the scarcity of labeled data presents significant challenges to this endeavor. In this paper, we introduce an automatic framework to assess the quality of the information extraction and its completeness. The framework focuses on information extraction in the form of entity and its properties. We discuss how to handle the input/output size limitations of the large language models and analyze their performance when iteratively extracting the information. Finally, we introduce metrics to evaluate the quality of the extraction and provide an extensive discussion on how to interpret the metrics.
Get summaries of the top AI research delivered straight to your inbox:
Overview
- This research paper explores methods for assessing the quality of information extraction from text.
- It examines techniques for capturing the structure of extracted information and evaluating its accuracy and completeness.
- The paper also discusses related work in information extraction and text analysis.
Plain English Explanation
The paper focuses on evaluating the performance of systems that extract useful information from text. When you read an article or document, you might want to pull out key facts, figures, or relationships - this is called information extraction. The researchers in this paper look at ways to measure how well these information extraction systems are doing their job.
One key aspect they explore is capturing the structure of the extracted information. This means understanding not just the individual pieces of information, but how they relate to each other. For example, if you extract a person's name, their job title, and the company they work for, you want to know that these pieces of information are connected.
The paper also discusses techniques for evaluating the accuracy and completeness of the extracted information. This could involve comparing the system's output to a "ground truth" dataset to see how well it matches up. The researchers look at different metrics and approaches for doing this kind of evaluation.
Overall, the goal is to develop better ways to assess the quality of information extraction systems, which are increasingly important as we deal with large amounts of text data from various sources. Improving these evaluation methods can help drive progress in the field and lead to more reliable and useful information extraction tools.
Technical Explanation
The paper proposes a framework for capturing the structure of extracted information and evaluating its quality. It first discusses related work in information extraction and text analysis, highlighting the need for more sophisticated evaluation methods.
The core of the paper focuses on the authors' approach to capturing the structure of extracted information. This involves modeling the relationships between different extracted entities and events, rather than just considering them in isolation. The authors describe various techniques for representing and analyzing these structural elements.
To evaluate the accuracy and completeness of the extracted information, the paper introduces a set of metrics that consider both the individual elements and the overall structure. These include measures of precision, recall, and coherence, as well as novel structural similarity metrics.
The authors also present the results of experiments applying their framework to real-world information extraction systems. They demonstrate the benefits of their approach compared to traditional evaluation methods, highlighting its ability to provide more nuanced and informative assessments.
Critical Analysis
The paper makes a compelling case for the importance of evaluating information extraction systems in terms of their ability to capture and represent the underlying structure of the extracted information. This is a valuable contribution, as many existing evaluation methods tend to focus solely on the individual elements without considering their relationships.
However, the paper does acknowledge some limitations of the proposed framework. For example, it relies on the availability of high-quality ground truth data, which can be challenging to obtain, especially for more complex or domain-specific information extraction tasks. The authors also note that their structural similarity metrics may be sensitive to the specific way the extracted information is represented.
Additionally, while the experiments demonstrate the benefits of the authors' approach, it would be helpful to see more extensive testing across a wider range of information extraction systems and domains. This could help validate the generalizability of the framework and identify any potential issues or edge cases.
Furthermore, the paper does not delve into the broader implications of improved information extraction evaluation, such as how it could inform the development of more robust and reliable systems, or how it might impact downstream applications that rely on extracted data.
Overall, the research presented in this paper represents an important step forward in the field of information extraction evaluation. By emphasizing the importance of structural considerations, the authors have laid the groundwork for more comprehensive and nuanced assessment of these critical technologies.
Conclusion
This research paper introduces a framework for assessing the quality of information extraction systems. The key focus is on capturing the structural relationships between the extracted information elements, rather than just considering them in isolation.
The authors propose various techniques for representing and analyzing these structural aspects, as well as a set of evaluation metrics that take the overall structure into account. Experiments demonstrate the benefits of this approach compared to traditional evaluation methods, highlighting its ability to provide more meaningful and informative assessments.
While the paper acknowledges some limitations and areas for further research, it represents an important contribution to the field of information extraction. By emphasizing the importance of structural considerations, the authors have laid the groundwork for the development of more robust and reliable information extraction systems, which will be increasingly crucial as we continue to grapple with large and complex text-based data.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
⛏️
A Survey on Open Information Extraction from Rule-based Model to Large Language Model
Pai Liu, Wenyang Gao, Wenjie Dong, Songfang Huang, Yue Zhang
0
0
Open information extraction is an important NLP task that targets extracting structured information from unstructured text without limitations on the relation type or the domain of the text. This survey paper covers open information extraction technologies from 2007 to 2022 with a focus on new models not covered by previous surveys. We propose a new categorization method from the source of information perspective to accommodate the development of recent OIE technologies. In addition, we summarize three major approaches based on task settings as well as current popular datasets and model evaluation metrics. Given the comprehensive review, several future directions are shown from datasets, source of information, output form, method, and evaluation metric aspects.
5/1/2024
Evaluating Generative Language Models in Information Extraction as Subjective Question Correction
Yuchen Fan, Yantao Liu, Zijun Yao, Jifan Yu, Lei Hou, Juanzi Li
0
0
Modern Large Language Models (LLMs) have showcased remarkable prowess in various tasks necessitating sophisticated cognitive behaviors. Nevertheless, a paradoxical performance discrepancy is observed, where these models underperform in seemingly elementary tasks like relation extraction and event extraction due to two issues in conventional evaluation. (1) The imprecision of existing evaluation metrics that struggle to effectively gauge semantic consistency between model outputs and ground truth, and (2) The inherent incompleteness of evaluation benchmarks, primarily due to restrictive human annotation schemas, resulting in underestimated LLM performances. Inspired by the principles in subjective question correction, we propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. This method innovatively utilizes LLMs, fine-tuned through subjective question correction data, to refine matching between model outputs and golden labels. Additionally, by incorporating a Natural Language Inference (NLI) model, SQC-Score enriches golden labels, addressing benchmark incompleteness by acknowledging correct yet previously omitted answers. Results on three information extraction tasks show that SQC-Score is more preferred by human annotators than the baseline metrics. Utilizing SQC-Score, we conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the state-of-the-art LLMs and provide insights for future research for information extraction. Dataset and associated codes can be accessed at https://github.com/THU-KEG/SQC-Score.
4/5/2024
Text Quality-Based Pruning for Efficient Training of Language Models
Vasu Sharma, Karthik Padthe, Newsha Ardalani, Kushal Tirumala, Russell Howes, Hu Xu, Po-Yao Huang, Shang-Wen Li, Armen Aghajanyan, Gargi Ghosh, Luke Zettlemoyer
0
0
In recent times training Language Models (LMs) have relied on computationally heavy training over massive datasets which makes this training process extremely laborious. In this paper we propose a novel method for numerically evaluating text quality in large unlabelled NLP datasets in a model agnostic manner to assign the text instances a quality score. By proposing the text quality metric, the paper establishes a framework to identify and eliminate low-quality text instances, leading to improved training efficiency for LM models. Experimental results over multiple models and datasets demonstrate the efficacy of this approach, showcasing substantial gains in training effectiveness and highlighting the potential for resource-efficient LM training. For example, we observe an absolute accuracy improvement of 0.9% averaged over 14 downstream evaluation tasks for multiple LM models while using 40% lesser data and training 42% faster when training on the OpenWebText dataset and 0.8% average absolute accuracy improvement while using 20% lesser data and training 21% faster on the Wikipedia dataset.
5/14/2024
🤿
On the Evaluation of Machine-Generated Reports
James Mayfield, Eugene Yang, Dawn Lawrie, Sean MacAvaney, Paul McNamee, Douglas W. Oard, Luca Soldaini, Ian Soboroff, Orion Weller, Efsun Kayi, Kate Sanders, Marc Mason, Noah Hibbler
0
0
Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled new ways to satisfy information needs. Although great strides have been made in applying them to settings like document ranking and short-form text generation, they still struggle to compose complete, accurate, and verifiable long-form reports. Reports with these qualities are necessary to satisfy the complex, nuanced, or multi-faceted information needs of users. In this perspective paper, we draw together opinions from industry and academia, and from a variety of related research areas, to present our vision for automatic report generation, and -- critically -- a flexible framework by which such reports can be evaluated. In contrast with other summarization tasks, automatic report generation starts with a detailed description of an information need, stating the necessary background, requirements, and scope of the report. Further, the generated reports should be complete, accurate, and verifiable. These qualities, which are desirable -- if not required -- in many analytic report-writing settings, require rethinking how to build and evaluate systems that exhibit these qualities. To foster new efforts in building these systems, we present an evaluation framework that draws on ideas found in various evaluations. To test completeness and accuracy, the framework uses nuggets of information, expressed as questions and answers, that need to be part of any high-quality generated report. Additionally, evaluation of citations that map claims made in the report to their source documents ensures verifiability.
5/13/2024