🤖 AI Summary
This study addresses the long-standing ambiguity in the logical interpretation of labels in natural language inference (NLI) tasks, which has led to biased assessments of model performance. The work proposes and empirically validates three distinct logical interpretations of the standard NLI label set. By leveraging examples with shared premises and data generated by large language models, the authors construct a meta-reasoning consistency evaluation framework. Applying this framework to the SNLI dataset reveals a strong alignment with one specific logical interpretation, offering crucial empirical evidence for understanding the intrinsic nature of NLI tasks and the reasoning behaviors of current models. This finding provides a principled basis for re-evaluating model capabilities and dataset design in NLI research.
📝 Abstract
Natural Language Inference (NLI) has been an important task for evaluating language models for Natural Language Understanding, but the logical properties of the task are poorly understood and often mischaracterized. Understanding the notion of inference captured by NLI is key to interpreting model performance on the task. In this paper we formulate three possible readings of the NLI label set and perform a comprehensive analysis of the meta-inferential properties they entail. Focusing on the SNLI dataset, we exploit (1) NLI items with shared premises and (2) items generated by LLMs to evaluate models trained on SNLI for meta-inferential consistency and derive insights into which reading of the logical relations is encoded by the dataset.