text: Dropout is a crucial regularization technique for the Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) models of Natural Language Inference (NLI). However, dropout has not been evaluated for the effectiveness at different layers and dropout rates in NLI models. In this paper, we propose a novel RNN model for NLI and empirically evaluate the effect of applying dropout at different layers in the model. We also investigate the impact of varying dropout rates at these layers. Our empirical evaluation on a large (Stanford Natural Language Inference (SNLI)) and a small (SciTail) dataset suggest that dropout at each feed-forward connection severely affects the model accuracy at increasing dropout rates. We also show that regularizing the embedding layer is efficient for SNLI whereas regularizing the recurrent layer improves the accuracy for SciTail. Our model achieved an accuracy (86.14 ) on the SNLI dataset and (77.05 ) on SciTail.
  @cite_8: We present a novel deep learning architecture to address the natural language inference (NLI) task. Existing approaches mostly rely on simple reading mechanisms for independent encoding of the premise and hypothesis. Instead, we propose a novel dependent reading bidirectional LSTM network (DR-BiLSTM) to efficiently model the relationship between a premise and a hypothesis during encoding and inference. We also introduce a sophisticated ensemble strategy to combine our proposed models, which noticeably improves final predictions. Finally, we demonstrate how the results can be improved further with an additional preprocessing step. Our evaluation shows that DR-BiLSTM obtains the best single model and ensemble model results achieving the new state-of-the-art scores on the Stanford NLI dataset.
  @cite_9: Tree-structured neural networks exploit valuable syntactic parse information as they interpret the meanings of sentences. However, they suer from two key technical problems that make them slow and unwieldyforlarge-scaleNLPtasks: theyusually operate on parsed sentences and they do not directly support batched computation. We address these issues by introducingtheStack-augmentedParser-Interpreter NeuralNetwork(SPINN),whichcombines parsing and interpretation within a single tree-sequence hybrid model by integrating tree-structured sentence interpretation into the linear sequential structure of a shiftreduceparser. Ourmodelsupportsbatched computation for a speedup of up to 25◊ over other tree-structured models, and its integrated parser can operate on unparsed data with little loss in accuracy. We evaluate it on the Stanford NLI entailment task and show that it significantly outperforms other sentence-encoding models.
  @cite_3: This paper presents a new deep learning architecture for Natural Language Inference (NLI). Firstly, we introduce a new compare-propagate architecture where alignments pairs are compared and then propagated to upper layers for enhanced representation learning. Secondly, we adopt novel factorization layers for efficient compression of alignment vectors into scalar valued features, which are then be used to augment the base word representations. The design of our approach is aimed to be conceptually simple, compact and yet powerful. We conduct experiments on three popular benchmarks, SNLI, MultiNLI and SciTail, achieving state-of-the-art performance on all. A lightweight parameterization of our model enjoys a @math reduction in parameter size compared to the ESIM and DIIN, while maintaining competitive performance. Visual analysis shows that our propagated features are highly interpretable, opening new avenues to explainability in neural NLI models.
  @cite_6: 
  @cite_5: Modeling informal inference in natural language is very challenging. With the recent availability of large annotated data, it has become feasible to train complex models such as neural networks to perform natural language inference (NLI), which have achieved state-of-the-art performance. Although there exist relatively large annotated data, can machines learn all knowledge needed to perform NLI from the data? If not, how can NLI models benefit from external knowledge and how to build NLI models to leverage it? In this paper, we aim to answer these questions by enriching the state-of-the-art neural natural language inference models with external knowledge. We demonstrate that the proposed models with external knowledge further improve the state of the art on the Stanford Natural Language Inference (SNLI) dataset.
  @cite_15: In this paper, we proposed a sentence encoding-based model for recognizing text entailment. In our approach, the encoding of sentence is a two-stage process. Firstly, average pooling was used over word-level bidirectional LSTM (biLSTM) to generate a first-stage sentence representation. Secondly, attention mechanism was employed to replace average pooling on the same sentence for better representations. Instead of using target sentence to attend words in source sentence, we utilized the sentence's first-stage representation to attend words appeared in itself, which is called "Inner-Attention" in our paper . Experiments conducted on Stanford Natural Language Inference (SNLI) Corpus has proved the effectiveness of "Inner-Attention" mechanism. With less number of parameters, our model outperformed the existing best sentence encoding-based approach by a large margin.
  @cite_13: Understanding entailment and contradiction is fundamental to understanding natural language, and inference about entailment and contradiction is a valuable testing ground for the development of semantic representations. However, machine learning research in this area has been dramatically limited by the lack of large-scale resources. To address this, we introduce the Stanford Natural Language Inference corpus, a new, freely available collection of labeled sentence pairs, written by humans doing a novel grounded task based on image captioning. At 570K pairs, it is two orders of magnitude larger than all other resources of its type. This increase in scale allows lexicalized classifiers to outperform some sophisticated existing entailment models, and it allows a neural network-based model to perform competitively on natural language inference benchmarks for the first time.
  @cite_11: 
summary: Different NLI models apply dropout at different layers in general NLI architecture. NLI models proposed by @cite_8 and @cite_3 apply dropout to each feed-forward layer in the network whereas others have applied dropout only to the final classifier layer @cite_15 . @cite_13 apply dropout only to the input and output of sentence encoding layers.The models proposed by @cite_9 and @cite_6 applied dropout to the output of embedding layer and to the input and output of classifier layer. @cite_5 and @cite_11 use dropout but they do not elaborate on the location.