PreprintCited by 12Natural Language Processing TechniquesTopic ModelingSpeech Recognition and Synthesis

On Exposure Bias, Hallucination and Domain Shift in Neural Machine Translation

Open access
Wang, Chaojun, Sennrich, Rico·2020·arXiv

Abstract

The standard training algorithm in neural machine translation (NMT) suffers from exposure bias, and alternative algorithms have been proposed to mitigate this. However, the practical impact of exposure bias is under debate. In this paper, we link exposure bias to another well-known problem in NMT, namely the tendency to generate hallucinations under domain shift. In experiments on three datasets with multiple test domains, we show that exposure bias is partially to blame for hallucinations, and that training with Minimum Risk Training, which avoids exposure bias, can mitigate this. Our analysis explains why exposure bias is more problematic under domain shift, and also links exposure bias to the beam search problem, i.e. performance deterioration with increasing beam size. Our results provide a new justification for methods that reduce exposure bias: even if they do not increase performance on in-domain test sets, they can increase model robustness to domain shift.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2005.03642

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In longform tasks generating multiple sentences or paragraphs, the hallucination problem can be exacerbated by exposure bias.

    “Further, in longform tasks consisting of generating multiple sentences or paragraphs, the hallucination problem can be exacerbated due to the issue of exposure bias (Wang and Sennrich, 2020).”

    From Chain-of-Verification Reduces Hallucination in Large Language Models (2024) · cites this paper as Wang and Sennrich, 2020

    The Conclusions (p. 5) link exposure bias to hallucinated neural machine translations, and the Uncertainty Analysis (p. 4) discusses error propagation during generation. The paper studies translation and does not establish that exposure bias exacerbates hallucinations specifically in longform, multi-sentence or multi-paragraph tasks. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. Dzmitry Bahdanau, Kyunghyun Cho, and Yoshua Bengio. 2015. Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate. In 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2015, San Diego, CA, USA, May 7-9, 2015, Conference Track Proceedings .
  2. Samy Bengio, Oriol Vinyals, Navdeep Jaitly, and Noam Shazeer. 2015. Scheduled sampling for sequence prediction with recurrent neural networks. In C. Cortes, N. D. Lawrence, D. D. Lee, M. Sugiyama, and R. Garnett, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 28 , pages 1171-1179. Curran Associates, Inc.
  3. Jean Carletta. 1996. Assessing agreement on classification tasks: The kappa statistic. Computational Linguistics , 22(2):249-254.
  4. Mauro Cettolo, Jan Niehues, Sebastian St¨ uker, Luisa Bentivogli, and Marcello Federico. 2014. Report on the 11th iwslt evaluation campaign, iwslt 2014. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Spoken Language Translation, Hanoi, Vietnam , page 57.
  5. Sergey Edunov, Myle Ott, Michael Auli, David Grangier, and Marc'Aurelio Ranzato. 2018. Classical structured prediction losses for sequence to sequence learning. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long Papers) , pages 355-364, New Orleans, Louisiana. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  6. Philipp Koehn, Hieu Hoang, Alexandra Birch, Chris Callison-Burch, Marcello Federico, Nicola Bertoldi, Brooke Cowan, Wade Shen, Christine Moran, Richard Zens, Chris Dyer, Ondˇ rej Bojar, Alexandra Constantin, and Evan Herbst. 2007. Moses: Open source toolkit for statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics Companion Volume Proceedings of the Demo and Poster Sessions , pages 177-180, Prague, Czech Republic. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  7. Philipp Koehn and Rebecca Knowles. 2017. Six challenges for neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Neural Machine Translation , pages 28-39, Vancouver. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  8. Taku Kudo. 2018. Subword regularization: Improving neural network translation models with multiple subword candidates. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P18-1007 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Chin-Yew Lin and Franz Josef Och. 2004. ORANGE: a method for evaluating automatic evaluation metrics for machine translation. In COLING 2004: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics , pages 501-507, Geneva, Switzerland. COLING.
  10. Pierre Lison and J¨ org Tiedemann. 2016. OpenSubtitles2016: Extracting large parallel corpora from movie and TV subtitles. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2016) , pages 923-929, Portoroˇ z, Slovenia. European Language Resources Association (ELRA).
  11. Xing Niu, Weijia Xu, and Marine Carpuat. 2019. Bidirectional differentiable input reconstruction for low-resource neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) , pages 442-448, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  12. Franz Josef Och. 2003. Minimum error rate training in statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics , pages 160-167, Sapporo, Japan. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  13. Myle Ott, Michael Auli, David Grangier, and Marc'Aurelio Ranzato. 2018. Analyzing uncertainty in neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning , Stockholm, Sweden.
  14. Kishore Papineni, Salim Roukos, Todd Ward, and WeiJing Zhu. 2002. Bleu: a method for automatic evaluation of machine translation. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics , pages 311-318, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  15. Matt Post. 2018. A call for clarity in reporting BLEU scores. In Proceedings of the Third Conference on Machine Translation: Research Papers , pages 186191, Belgium, Brussels. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  16. Marc'Aurelio Ranzato, Sumit Chopra, Michael Auli, and Wojciech Zaremba. 2016. Sequence level training with recurrent neural networks. In 4th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2016, San Juan, Puerto Rico, May 2-4, 2016, Conference Track Proceedings .
  17. Yves Scherrer and Bruno Cartoni. 2012. The trilingual ALLEGRA corpus: Presentation and possible use for lexicon induction. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2012) , pages 2890-2896, Istanbul, Turkey. European Languages Resources Association (ELRA).
  18. Rico Sennrich, Orhan Firat, Kyunghyun Cho, Alexandra Birch, Barry Haddow, Julian Hitschler, Marcin Junczys-Dowmunt, Samuel L¨ aubli, Antonio Valerio Miceli Barone, Jozef Mokry, and Maria N˘ adejde. 2017. Nematus: a toolkit for neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the Software Demonstrations of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics , pages 65-68, Valencia, Spain. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  19. Rico Sennrich, Barry Haddow, and Alexandra Birch. 2016. Neural machine translation of rare words with subword units. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , pages 17151725, Berlin, Germany. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  20. Shiqi Shen, Yong Cheng, Zhongjun He, Wei He, Hua Wu, Maosong Sun, and Yang Liu. 2016. Minimum risk training for neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , pages 1683-1692, Berlin, Germany. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  21. Felix Stahlberg and Bill Byrne. 2019. On NMT search errors and model errors: Cat got your tongue? In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP) , pages 33473353, Hong Kong, China. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  22. Ilya Sutskever, Oriol Vinyals, and Quoc V Le. 2014. Sequence to sequence learning with neural networks. In Z. Ghahramani, M. Welling, C. Cortes, N. D. Lawrence, and K. Q. Weinberger, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 27 , pages 3104-3112. Curran Associates, Inc.
  23. C. Szegedy, V. Vanhoucke, S. Ioffe, J. Shlens, and Z. Wojna. 2016. Rethinking the inception architecture for computer vision. In 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages 2818-2826.
  24. Zhaopeng Tu, Yang Liu, Lifeng Shang, Xiaohua Liu, and Hang Li. 2017. Neural machine translation with reconstruction. In Proceedings of the ThirtyFirst AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , AAAI'17, pages 3097-3103. AAAI Press.
  25. Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Ł ukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. In I. Guyon, U. V. Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 , pages 5998-6008. Curran Associates, Inc.
  26. Sam Wiseman and Alexander M. Rush. 2016. Sequence-to-sequence learning as beam-search optimization. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages 1296-1306, Austin, Texas. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  27. Felix Wu, Angela Fan, Alexei Baevski, Yann Dauphin, and Michael Auli. 2019. Pay less attention with lightweight and dynamic convolutions. In International Conference on Learning Representations .
  28. Lijun Wu, Xu Tan, Di He, Fei Tian, Tao Qin, Jianhuang Lai, and Tie-Yan Liu. 2018. Beyond error propagation in neural machine translation: Characteristics of language also matter. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages 3602-3611, Brussels, Belgium. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  29. Yilin Yang, Liang Huang, and Mingbo Ma. 2018. Breaking the beam search curse: A study of (re)scoring methods and stopping criteria for neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages 3054-3059, Brussels, Belgium. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  30. Wen Zhang, Yang Feng, Fandong Meng, Di You, and Qun Liu. 2019. Bridging the gap between training and inference for neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics , pages 43344343, Florence, Italy. Association for Computational Linguistics.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, C., & Sennrich, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Sennrich, Rico
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2020
OpenAlex
W3022463379
Cited by
12
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1
FWCI
0.86
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (176727)
  • Samsung
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/S001271/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
Keywords
exposure bias, hallucinations, domain shift, neural machine translation, beam search, spot size, model robustness, out-of-domain generalization

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