IP Library Granted Patent US 12,205,027
Granted Patent B2
US 12,205,027 · App. 17/840,987 · Granted Jan 21, 2025

Multi-hop evidence pursuit

Inventor: Christopher Malon (Fort Lee, NJ)
Assignee: NEC Corporation
G06N3/08G06F40/166G06F40/258G06F40/40
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,205,027
App. No.
17/840,987
Granted
Jan 21, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

A method for neural network training is provided. The method inputs a training set of textual claims, lists of evidence including gold evidence chains, and claim labels labelling the evidence with respect to the textual claims. The claim labels include refutes, supports, and not enough information (NEI). The method computes an initial set of document retrievals for each of the textual claims. The method also includes computing an initial set of page element retrievals including sentence retrievals from the initial set of document retrievals for each of the textual claims. The method creates, from the training set of textual claims, a Leave Out Training Set which includes input texts and target texts relating to the labels. The method trains a sequence-to-sequence neural network to generate new target texts from new input texts using the Leave Out Training Set.

Claims (57)

1. A computer-implemented method for neural network training, comprising:

inputting a training set of textual claims, lists of evidence including gold evidence chains, and claim labels labelling the evidence with respect to the textual claims, the claim labels including refutes, supports, and not enough information (NEI);

computing an initial set of document retrievals for each of the textual claims;

computing an initial set of page element retrievals including sentence retrievals from the initial set of document retrievals for each of the textual claims;

creating, from the training set of textual claims, a Leave Out Training Set which includes input texts and target texts, where

(a) if any evidence in a gold evidence chain comes from a document not in the initial set, setting a target text to be the claim label plus a first piece of missing evidence, and setting the input text to be a list of retrieved document titles from the initial set plus a corresponding textual claim plus a concatenation of all other evidence in the gold evidence chain; and

(b) for a fraction of remaining documents, randomly selected in the initial set, including all labeled NEI, setting the claim label plus a random piece of evidence as the target text, and setting the input text to be the list of retrieved document titles plus the corresponding textual claim plus a concatenation of all other evidence in a corresponding gold evidence chain; and

training, by a processor device, a sequence-to-sequence neural network to generate new target texts from new input texts using the Leave Out Training Set.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein said creating step further comprises: (c) for other documents in the initial set, setting the target to be the claim label plus the word none, and setting the input text to be the list of retrieved document titles plus the corresponding textual claim plus the concatenation of all evidence in the corresponding gold evidence chain.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein computing an initial set of document retrievals for each of the textual claims in the training set comprises using a Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency (TFIDF) document retriever queried by the claims.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further comprising performance an inference method subsequent to the training method, the inference method comprising:

inputting a claim with a list of retrieved evidence from a previous hop, and a list of retrieved documents;

computing an input text as a list of retrieved document titles plus the claim plus a concatenation of retrieved evidence; and

applying a trained sequence-to-sequence neural network to compute a predicted label, an imagined title, and imagined evidence.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 4 , wherein said inference method further comprises:

retrieving a document with the imagined title if possible, or else use previous document retrievals;

finding one or more sentences or one or more other page elements including table cells in the retrieved document or document retrievals that best match the imagined evidence according to a counting-based or machine-learning based sentence matcher, ignoring existing evidence that is already in the current set of retrieved evidence; and

forming a list of retrieved evidence for a next hop by adding sentences or page elements to a top of the list of retrieved evidence from the previous hop.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 5 , wherein said forming step further comprising removing a same number of elements from the bottom of the list of retrieved evidence from the previous hop.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 5 , further comprising:

classifying the retrieved evidence in the list with a final label classification; and

displaying on a display device the final label classification with the retrieved evidence in the list.

8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the sequence-to-sequence neural network is a Unified Text to Text Transformer.

9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein (a) if any evidence in a gold evidence chain comes from the document not in the initial set, setting the target text to be the label, except supports if the label is NEI, plus the first piece of missing evidence.

10. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein (b) for the random half of remaining documents in the initial set, including all labeled NEI, setting the label, except supports if the label is NEI, plus the random piece of evidence as the target text.

11. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein computing an initial set of page element retrievals for each of the textual claims in the training set corpus comprises using a Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency retriever queried by the claims.

12. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein computing an initial set of page element retrievals for each of the textual claims in the training set corpus comprises using a neural network based ranking module queried by the claims.

13. A computer program product for neural network training, the computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable storage medium having program instructions embodied therewith, the program instructions executable by a computer to cause the computer to perform a method comprising:

inputting, by a user interface of the computer, a training set of textual claims, lists of evidence including gold evidence chains, and claim labels labelling the evidence with respect to the textual claims, the claim labels including refutes, supports, and not enough information (NEI);

computing, by a processor device of the computer, an initial set of document retrievals for each of the textual claims;

computing, by the processor device, an initial set of page element retrievals including sentence retrievals from the initial set of document retrievals for each of the textual claims;

creating, by the processor device from the training set of textual claims, a Leave Out Training Set which includes input texts and target texts, where

(a) if any evidence in a gold evidence chain comes from a document not in the initial set, setting a target text to be the claim label plus a first piece of missing evidence, and setting the input text to be a list of retrieved document titles from the initial set plus a corresponding textual claim plus a concatenation of all other evidence in the gold evidence chain; and

(b) for a fraction of remaining documents, randomly selected in the initial set, including all labeled NEI, setting the claim label plus a random piece of evidence as the target text, and setting the input text to be the list of retrieved document titles plus the corresponding textual claim plus a concatenation of all other evidence in a corresponding gold evidence chain; and

training, by the processor device, a sequence-to-sequence neural network to generate new target texts from new input texts using the Leave Out Training Set.

14. The computer program product of claim 13 , wherein said creating step further comprises: (c) for other documents in the initial set, setting the target to be the claim label plus the word none, and setting the input text to be the list of retrieved document titles plus the corresponding textual claim plus the concatenation of all evidence in the corresponding gold evidence chain.

15. The computer program product of claim 13 , wherein computing an initial set of document retrievals for each of the textual claims in the training set comprises using a Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency (TFIDF) document retriever queried by the claims.

16. The computer program product of claim 13 , further comprising performance an inference method subsequent to the training method, the inference method comprising:

inputting a claim with a list of retrieved evidence from a previous hop, and a list of retrieved documents;

computing an input text as a list of retrieved document titles plus the claim plus a concatenation of retrieved evidence; and

applying a trained sequence-to-sequence neural network to compute a predicted label, an imagined title, and imagined evidence.

17. The computer program product of claim 16 , wherein said inference method further comprises:

retrieving a document with the imagined title if possible, or else use previous document retrievals;

finding one or more sentences or one or more other page elements including table cells in the retrieved document or document retrievals that best match the imagined evidence according to a counting based or machine-learning based sentence matcher, ignoring existing evidence that is already in the current set of retrieved evidence; and

forming a list of retrieved evidence for a next hop by adding sentences or page elements to a top of the list of retrieved evidence from the previous hop.

18. The computer program product of claim 17 , wherein said forming step further comprising removing a same number of elements from the bottom of the list of retrieved evidence from the previous hop.

19. A computer processing system for neural network training, comprising:

a memory device for storing program code;

a processor device operatively coupled to the memory device for running the program code to:

input a training set of textual claims, lists of evidence including gold evidence chains, and claim labels labelling the evidence with respect to the textual claims, the claim labels including refutes, supports, and not enough information (NEI);

compute an initial set of document retrievals for each of the textual claims;

compute an initial set of page element retrievals including sentence retrievals from the initial set of document retrievals for each of the textual claims;

create, from the training set of textual claims, a Leave Out Training Set which includes input texts and target texts, where

(a) if any evidence in a gold evidence chain comes from a document not in the initial set, set a target text to be the claim label plus a first piece of missing evidence, and set the input text to be a list of retrieved document titles from the initial set plus a corresponding textual claim plus a concatenation of all other evidence in the gold evidence chain; and

(b) for a fraction of remaining documents, randomly selected in the initial set, including all labeled NEI, set the claim label plus a random piece of evidence as the target text, and set the input text to be the list of retrieved document titles plus the corresponding textual claim plus a concatenation of all other evidence in a corresponding gold evidence chain; and

train a sequence-to-sequence neural network to generate new target texts from new input texts using the Leave Out Training Set.

20. The computer processing system of claim 19 , wherein said processor device further runs the program code such that creating the Leave Out Training Set further comprises: (c) for other documents in the initial set, setting the target to be the claim label plus the word none, and setting the input text to be the list of retrieved document titles plus the corresponding textual claim plus the concatenation of all evidence in the corresponding gold evidence chain.

Assignments (2)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Dec 10, 2024
From: NEC LABORATORIES AMERICA, INC.
To: NEC CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 069540/0269 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jun 15, 2022
From: MALON, CHRISTOPHER
To: NEC LABORATORIES AMERICA, INC.
Reel/Frame 060214/0367 →
Continuity (2)
Provisional Application 63227401 · Jul 30, 2021
Related Publication 20230035641A1 · Feb 2, 2023
References Cited (21)
US 20160350410A1 · Aharoni · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20200050621A1 · Malon · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210192377A1 · Malon · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210406741A1 · Poon · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20220067278A1 · Huang · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220237382A1 · Abraham · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220383159A1 · Yavuz · 2022 [cited by examiner]
Xu, Weiwen, et al. “Exploiting reasoning chains for multi-hop science question answering.” arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.02905 (2021). (Year: 2021). [cited by examiner]
Yadav, Vikas, Steven Bethard, and Mihai Surdeanu. “Unsupervised alignment-based iterative evidence retrieval for multi-hop question answering.” arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.01218 (2020). (Year: 2020). [cited by examiner]
Aly et al., “FEVEROUS: Fact Extraction and VERification Over Unstructured and Structured information”, arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.05707, Jun. 10, 2021, pp. 1-32. [cited by applicant]
Cao et al., “Autoregressive entity retrieval”, arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.00904, Oct. 2, 2020, pp. 1-20. [cited by applicant]
Dau et al., “DROP: A Reading Comprehension Benchmark Requiring Discrete Reasoning Over Paragraphs” Proceedings of NAACL-HLT 2019, Mar. 1, 2019, pp. 2368-2378. [cited by applicant]
Gupta et al., “Neural Module Networks for Reasoning Over Text”, arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.04971, Dec. 10, 2019, pp. 1-17. [cited by applicant]
Karpukhin et al., “Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answering”, Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Apr. 10, 2020, pp. 6769-6781. [cited by applicant]
Liu et al., “ROBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach”, arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.11692, Jul. 26, 2019, pp. 1-13. [cited by applicant]
Malon et al., “Team Papelo: Transformer Networks at FEVER”, arXiv preprint arXiv:1901.02534, Jan. 8, 2019, pp. 1-5. [cited by applicant]
Raffel et al., “Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer”, J. Mach. Learn. Res . . . Jun. 2020, pp. 1-67. [cited by applicant]
Saha et al., “Weakly Supervised Neuro-Symbolic Module Networks for Numerical Reasoning”, arXiv:2101.11802v1 [cs.CL], Jan. 28, 2021, pp. 1-22. [cited by applicant]
Schlichtkrull et al., “Joint Verification and Reranking for Open Fact Checking Over Tables”, arXiv:2012.15115v2 [cs.CL] Aug. 20, 2021, pp. 1-13. [cited by applicant]
Thorne et al., “Evidence-based Factual Error Correction”, arXiv:2012.15788v2 [cs.CL], Jun. 11, 2021, pp. 1-12. [cited by applicant]
Thorne et al., “FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERification”, Proceedings of NAACL-HLT 2018, Mar. 14, 2018, pp. 809-819. [cited by applicant]