The popular subword tokenizers of current language models, such as Byte-Pair Encoding (BPE), are known not to respect morpheme boundaries, which affects the downstream performance of the models. While many improved tokenization algorithms have been proposed, their evaluation and cross-comparison is still an open problem. As a solution, we propose a combined intrinsic-extrinsic evaluation framework for subword tokenization. Intrinsic evaluation is based on our new UniMorph Labeller tool that classifies subword tokenization as either morphological or alien. Extrinsic evaluation, in turn, is performed via the Out-of-Vocabulary Generalization Challenge 1.0 benchmark, which consists of three newly specified downstream text classification tasks. Our empirical findings show that the accuracy of UniMorph Labeller is 98%, and that, in all language models studied (including ALBERT, BERT, RoBERTa, and DeBERTa), alien tokenization leads to poorer generalizations compared to morphological tokenization for semantic compositionality of word meanings.

The ability to generalise well is one of the primary desiderata of natural language processing (NLP). Yet, what 'good generalisation' entails and how it should be evaluated is not well understood, nor are there any evaluation standards for generalisation. In this paper, we lay the groundwork to address both of these issues. We present a taxonomy for characterising and understanding generalisation research in NLP. Our taxonomy is based on an extensive literature review of generalisation research, and contains five axes along which studies can differ: their main motivation, the type of generalisation they investigate, the type of data shift they consider, the source of this data shift, and the locus of the shift within the modelling pipeline. We use our taxonomy to classify over 400 papers that test generalisation, for a total of more than 600 individual experiments. Considering the results of this review, we present an in-depth analysis that maps out the current state of generalisation research in NLP, and we make recommendations for which areas might deserve attention in the future. Along with this paper, we release a webpage where the results of our review can be dynamically explored, and which we intend to update as new NLP generalisation studies are published. With this work, we aim to take steps towards making state-of-the-art generalisation testing the new status quo in NLP.

As the role of algorithmic systems and processes increases in society, so does the risk of bias, which can result in discrimination against individuals and social groups. Research on algorithmic bias has exploded in recent years, highlighting both the problems of bias, and the potential solutions, in terms of algorithmic transparency (AT). Transparency is important for facilitating fairness management as well as explainability in algorithms; however, the concept of diversity, and its relationship to bias and transparency, has been largely left out of the discussion. We reflect on the relationship between diversity and bias, arguing that diversity drives the need for transparency. Using a perspective-taking lens, which takes diversity as a given, we propose a conceptual framework to characterize the problem and solution spaces of AT, to aid its application in algorithmic systems. Example cases from three research domains are described using our framework.