TY - GEN
T1 - Exploring Methods for Generating Feedback Comments for Writing Learning
AU - Hanawa, Kazuaki
AU - Nagata, Ryo
AU - Inui, Kentaro
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was partly supported by Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST), PRESTO Grant Number JPMJPR1758, Japan.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Association for Computational Linguistics
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - The task of generating explanatory notes for language learners is known as feedback comment generation. Although various generation techniques are available, little is known about which methods are appropriate for this task. Nagata (2019) demonstrates the effectiveness of neural-retrieval-based methods in generating feedback comments for preposition use. Retrieval-based methods have limitations in that they can only output feedback comments existing in a given training data. Furthermore, feedback comments can be made on other grammatical and writing items than preposition use, which is still unaddressed. To shed light on these points, we investigate a wider range of methods for generating many feedback comments in this study. Our close analysis of the type of task leads us to investigate three different architectures for comment generation: (i) a neural-retrieval-based method as a baseline, (ii) a pointer-generator-based generation method as a neural seq2seq method, (iii) a retrieve-and-edit method, a hybrid of (i) and (ii). Intuitively, the pointer-generator should outperform neural-retrieval, and retrieve-and-edit should perform best. However, in our experiments, this expectation is completely overturned. We closely analyze the results to reveal the major causes of these counter-intuitive results and report on our findings from the experiments.
AB - The task of generating explanatory notes for language learners is known as feedback comment generation. Although various generation techniques are available, little is known about which methods are appropriate for this task. Nagata (2019) demonstrates the effectiveness of neural-retrieval-based methods in generating feedback comments for preposition use. Retrieval-based methods have limitations in that they can only output feedback comments existing in a given training data. Furthermore, feedback comments can be made on other grammatical and writing items than preposition use, which is still unaddressed. To shed light on these points, we investigate a wider range of methods for generating many feedback comments in this study. Our close analysis of the type of task leads us to investigate three different architectures for comment generation: (i) a neural-retrieval-based method as a baseline, (ii) a pointer-generator-based generation method as a neural seq2seq method, (iii) a retrieve-and-edit method, a hybrid of (i) and (ii). Intuitively, the pointer-generator should outperform neural-retrieval, and retrieve-and-edit should perform best. However, in our experiments, this expectation is completely overturned. We closely analyze the results to reveal the major causes of these counter-intuitive results and report on our findings from the experiments.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85127441247&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85127441247&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85127441247
T3 - EMNLP 2021 - 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Proceedings
SP - 9719
EP - 9730
BT - EMNLP 2021 - 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Proceedings
PB - Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL)
T2 - 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2021
Y2 - 7 November 2021 through 11 November 2021
ER -