The DOI matches its Crossref record; 78 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Muppet: Massive Multi-task Representations with Pre-Finetuning
Open accessAbstract
We propose pre-finetuning, an additional largescale learning stage between language model pre-training and fine-tuning.Pre-finetuning is massively multi-task learning (around 50 datasets, over 4.8 million total labeled examples), and is designed to encourage learning of representations that generalize better to many different tasks.We show that prefinetuning consistently improves performance for pretrained discriminators (e.g.RoBERTa) and generation models (e.g.BART) on a wide range of tasks (sentence prediction, commonsense reasoning, MRC, etc.), while also significantly improving sample efficiency during fine-tuning.We also show that large-scale multi-tasking is crucial; pre-finetuning can hurt performance when few tasks are used up until a critical point (usually above 15) after which performance improves linearly in the number of tasks.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization
Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1412.6980 · Cited by 98,946
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1810.04805 · Cited by 73,173
(2014) · Cited by 33,419
Rethinking the Inception Architecture for Computer Vision
Szegedy, C., Vanhoucke, V., Ioffe, S., Shlens, J., & Wojna, Z. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.308 · Cited by 32,138
RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach
Liu, Y., Ott, M., Goyal, N., Du, J., Joshi, M., Chen, D., Levy, O., Lewis, M., Zettlemoyer, L., & Stoyanov, V. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1907.11692 · Cited by 16,515
Self-citationExploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer
Raffel, C., Shazeer, N., Roberts, A., Lee, K., Narang, S., Matena, M., Zhou, Y., Li, W., & Liu, P. J. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.10683 · Cited by 10,929
Lewis, M., Liu, Y., Goyal, N., Ghazvininejad, M., Mohamed, A., Levy, O., Stoyanov, V., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2020) · Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.703 · Cited by 8,821
Self-citationBuilding a Large Annotated Corpus of English: The Penn Treebank
Marcus, M. (1993) · doi:10.21236/ada273556 · Cited by 7,405
Recursive Deep Models for Semantic Compositionality Over a Sentiment Treebank
Socher, R., Perelygin, A., Wu, J., Chuang, J., Manning, C. D., Ng, A., & Potts, C. (2013) · Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d13-1170 · Cited by 6,878
XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understanding
Yang, Z., Dai, Z., Yang, Y., Carbonell, J., Salakhutdinov, R., & Le, Q. V. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1906.08237 · Cited by 6,687
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Hector Levesque, Ernest Davis, and Leora Morgen- stern. 2012. The winograd schema challenge. In Thirteenth International Conference on the Princi- ples of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Citeseer.
- Xin Li and Dan Roth. 2002. Learning question clas- sifiers. In COLING 2002: The 19th International Conference on Computational Linguistics.
- Alec Radford, Jeffrey Wu, Rewon Child, David Luan, Dario Amodei, and Ilya Sutskever. 2019. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI Blog, 1(8):9.
- Melissa Roemmele, Cosmin Adrian Bejan, and An- drew S. Gordon. 2011. Choice of plausible alterna- tives: An evaluation of commonsense causal reason- ing. In 2011 AAAI Spring Symposium Series.
- Christian Szegedy, Vincent Vanhoucke, Sergey Ioffe, Jonathon Shlens, and Zbigniew Wojna. 2015. Re- thinking the inception architecture for computer vi- sion. corr abs/1512.00567 (2015). · arXiv
- Adina Williams, Nikita Nangia, and Samuel Bowman. 2018b. A broad-coverage challenge corpus for sen- tence understanding through inference. In Proceed- ings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Lin- guistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long Papers), pages 1112-1122. Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Xiang Zhang, Junbo Jake Zhao, and Yann LeCun. 2015b. Character-level convolutional networks for text classification. In NIPS.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learners
Wei, J., Bosma, M., Zhao, V. Y., Guu, K., Yu, A. W., Lester, B., Du, N., Dai, A. M., & Le, Q. V. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.01652 · Cited by 1,101
Rethinking the Role of Demonstrations: What Makes In-Context Learning Work?
Min, S., Lyu, X., Holtzman, A., Artetxe, M., Lewis, M., Hajishirzi, H., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2202.12837 · Cited by 752
Self-citationRethinking the Role of Demonstrations: What Makes In-Context Learning Work?
Min, S., Lyu, X., Holtzman, A., Artetxe, M., Lewis, M., Hajishirzi, H., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2022) · Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.759 · Cited by 755
Self-citationCross-Task Generalization via Natural Language Crowdsourcing Instructions
Mishra, S., Khashabi, D., Baral, C., & Hajishirzi, H. (2022) · Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.acl-long.244 · Cited by 269
Xie, T., Wu, C. H., Shi, P., Zhong, R., Scholak, T., Yasunaga, M., Wu, C.-S., Zhong, M., Yin, P., Wang, S. I., et al. (2022) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.39 · Cited by 271
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Aghajanyan, A., Gupta, A., Shrivastava, A., Chen, X., Zettlemoyer, L., & Gupta, S.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
- Published
- 2021
- Pages
- 5799-5811
- OpenAlex
- W3124687886
- Cited by
- 183
- References
- 82
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 64 · 2022: 55 · 2021: 13
- FWCI
- 17.90
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- multi-task learning, representation learning, language model pretraining, fine-tuning, sample efficiency, RoBERTa, BART, commonsense reasoning, machine reading comprehension, sentence prediction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
