Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2009.12681

Clustering-based Unsupervised Generative Relation Extraction

Abstract

This paper focuses on the problem of unsupervised relation extraction. Existing probabilistic generative model-based relation extraction methods work by extracting sentence features and using these features as inputs to train a generative model. This model is then used to cluster similar relations. However, these methods do not consider correlations between sentences with the same entity pair during training, which can negatively impact model performance. To address this issue, we propose a Clustering-based Unsupervised generative Relation Extraction (CURE) framework that leverages an "Encoder-Decoder" architecture to perform self-supervised learning so the encoder can extract relation information. Given multiple sentences with the same entity pair as inputs, self-supervised learning is deployed by predicting the shortest path between entity pairs on the dependency graph of one of the sentences. After that, we extract the relation information using the well-trained encoder. Then, entity pairs that share the same relation are clustered based on their corresponding relation information. Each cluster is labeled with a few words based on the words in the shortest paths corresponding to the entity pairs in each cluster. These cluster labels also describe the meaning of these relation clusters. We compare the triplets extracted by our proposed framework (CURE) and baseline methods with a ground-truth Knowledge Base. Experimental results show that our model performs better than state-of-the-art models on both New York Times (NYT) and United Nations Parallel Corpus (UNPC) standard datasets.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Chenhan Yuan, Ryan Rossi, Andrew Katz, Hoda Eldardiry. 2020-09-26. Clustering-based Unsupervised Generative Relation Extraction. https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.12681

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

SafetyFlow: An Agent-Flow System for Automated LLM Safety Benchmarking

The rapid proliferation of large language models (LLMs) has intensified the requirement for reliable safety evaluation to uncover model vulnerabilities. To this end, numerous LLM safety evaluation benchmarks are proposed. However, existing benchmarks generally rely on labor-intensive manual curation, which causes excessive time and resource consumption. They also exhibit significant redundancy and limited difficulty. To alleviate these problems, we introduce SafetyFlow, the first agent-flow system designed to automate the construction of LLM safety benchmarks. SafetyFlow can automatically build a comprehensive safety benchmark in only four days without any human intervention by orchestrating seven specialized agents, significantly reducing time and resource cost. Equipped with versatile tools, the agents of SafetyFlow ensure process and cost controllability while integrating human expertise into the automatic pipeline. The final constructed dataset, SafetyFlowBench, contains 23,446 queries with low redundancy and strong discriminative power. Our contribution includes the first fully automated benchmarking pipeline and a comprehensive safety benchmark. We evaluate the safety of 49 advanced LLMs on our dataset and conduct extensive experiments to validate our efficacy and efficiency.

cs.CL

Geometric Uncertainty for Detecting and Correcting Hallucinations in LLMs

Large language models are known to hallucinate, generating linguistically plausible but incorrect answers to questions. Uncertainty quantification has been proposed as a strategy to detect such behaviour, but existing methods lack a unified framework to assess reliability at both the prompt and answer level. We introduce a geometric framework which quantifies language model uncertainty at both levels by explicitly modelling a prompt-conditioned semantic distribution in answer embedding space. Our approach is black-box and sampling-based; we generate multiple answers per prompt, and use archetypal analysis to estimate a geometric support for the answer distribution. At the prompt level, we approximate the distribution entropy to quantify uncertainty; for each individual answer, we then use notions of atypicality to assess its reliability relative to the batch. We employ our framework to not only detect hallucinations but correct them, by selecting the batch example deemed most reliable. Experiments show that our framework performs comparably to or better than prior methods on short form question-answering datasets, and achieves superior results on medical datasets where hallucinations carry particularly critical risks. Beyond pure performance, we suggest the theoretical grounding of our work provides support for semantic distributions as useful objects of study for language model uncertainty.

cs.CL

Calibrated Confidence Expression for Radiology Report Generation

Safe deployment of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) in radiology report generation requires not only accurate predictions but also clinically interpretable indicators of when outputs should be thoroughly reviewed, enabling selective radiologist verification and reducing the risk of hallucinated findings influencing clinical decisions. One intuitive approach to this is verbalized confidence, where the model explicitly states its certainty. However, current state-of-the-art language models are often overconfident, and research on calibration in multimodal settings such as radiology report generation is limited. To address this gap, we introduce ConRad (Confidence Calibration for Radiology Reports), a reinforcement learning framework for fine-tuning medical LVLMs to produce calibrated verbalized confidence estimates alongside radiology reports. We study two settings: a single report-level confidence score and a sentence-level variant assigning a confidence to each claim. Both are trained using the GRPO algorithm with reward functions based on the logarithmic scoring rule, which incentivizes truthful self-assessment by penalizing miscalibration and guarantees optimal calibration under reward maximization. Experimentally, ConRad substantially improves calibration and outperforms competing methods. In a clinical evaluation we show that ConRad's report level scores are well aligned with clinicians' judgment. By highlighting full reports or low-confidence statements for targeted review, ConRad can support safer clinical integration of AI-assistance for report generation.

cs.CL