Michael Paul

Also published as: Michael J. Paul


2020

pdf bib
Why Overfitting Isn’t Always Bad: Retrofitting Cross-Lingual Word Embeddings to Dictionaries
Mozhi Zhang | Yoshinari Fujinuma | Michael J. Paul | Jordan Boyd-Graber
Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Cross-lingual word embeddings (CLWE) are often evaluated on bilingual lexicon induction (BLI). Recent CLWE methods use linear projections, which underfit the training dictionary, to generalize on BLI. However, underfitting can hinder generalization to other downstream tasks that rely on words from the training dictionary. We address this limitation by retrofitting CLWE to the training dictionary, which pulls training translation pairs closer in the embedding space and overfits the training dictionary. This simple post-processing step often improves accuracy on two downstream tasks, despite lowering BLI test accuracy. We also retrofit to both the training dictionary and a synthetic dictionary induced from CLWE, which sometimes generalizes even better on downstream tasks. Our results confirm the importance of fully exploiting training dictionary in downstream tasks and explains why BLI is a flawed CLWE evaluation.

pdf bib
Multilingual Twitter Corpus and Baselines for Evaluating Demographic Bias in Hate Speech Recognition
Xiaolei Huang | Linzi Xing | Franck Dernoncourt | Michael J. Paul
Proceedings of The 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference

Existing research on fairness evaluation of document classification models mainly uses synthetic monolingual data without ground truth for author demographic attributes. In this work, we assemble and publish a multilingual Twitter corpus for the task of hate speech detection with inferred four author demographic factors: age, country, gender and race/ethnicity. The corpus covers five languages: English, Italian, Polish, Portuguese and Spanish. We evaluate the inferred demographic labels with a crowdsourcing platform, Figure Eight. To examine factors that can cause biases, we take an empirical analysis of demographic predictability on the English corpus. We measure the performance of four popular document classifiers and evaluate the fairness and bias of the baseline classifiers on the author-level demographic attributes.