In this technical report, we introduce Effidit (Efficient and Intelligent Editing), a digital writing assistant that facilitates users to write higher-quality text more efficiently by using artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. Previous writing assistants typically provide the function of error checking (to detect and correct spelling and grammatical errors) and limited text-rewriting functionality. With the emergence of large-scale neural language models, some systems support automatically completing a sentence or a paragraph. In Effidit, we significantly expand the capacities of a writing assistant by providing functions in five categories: text completion, error checking, text polishing, keywords to sentences (K2S), and cloud input methods (cloud IME). In the text completion category, Effidit supports generation-based sentence completion, retrieval-based sentence completion, and phrase completion. In contrast, many other writing assistants so far only provide one or two of the three functions. For text polishing, we have three functions: (context-aware) phrase polishing, sentence paraphrasing, and sentence expansion, whereas many other writing assistants often support one or two functions in this category. The main contents of this report include major modules of Effidit, methods for implementing these modules, and evaluation results of some key methods.

Paraphrase generation is an important NLP task that has achieved significant progress recently. However, one crucial problem is overlooked, `how to evaluate the quality of paraphrase?'. Most existing paraphrase generation models use reference-based metrics (e.g., BLEU) from neural machine translation (NMT) to evaluate their generated paraphrase. Such metrics' reliability is hardly evaluated, and they are only plausible when there exists a standard reference. Therefore, this paper first answers one fundamental question, `Are existing metrics reliable for paraphrase generation?'. We present two conclusions that disobey conventional wisdom in paraphrasing generation: (1) existing metrics poorly align with human annotation in system-level and segment-level paraphrase evaluation. (2) reference-free metrics outperform reference-based metrics, indicating that the standard references are unnecessary to evaluate the paraphrase's quality. Such empirical findings expose a lack of reliable automatic evaluation metrics. Therefore, this paper proposes BBScore, a reference-free metric that can reflect the generated paraphrase's quality. BBScore consists of two sub-metrics: S3C score and SelfBLEU, which correspond to two criteria for paraphrase evaluation: semantic preservation and diversity. By connecting two sub-metrics, BBScore significantly outperforms existing paraphrase evaluation metrics.

Relation extraction is an important task in knowledge acquisition and text understanding. Existing works mainly focus on improving relation extraction by extracting effective features or designing reasonable model structures. However, few works have focused on how to validate and correct the results generated by the existing relation extraction models. We argue that validation is an important and promising direction to further improve the performance of relation extraction. In this paper, we explore the possibility of using question answering as validation. Specifically, we propose a novel question-answering based framework to validate the results from relation extraction models. Our proposed framework can be easily applied to existing relation classifiers without any additional information. We conduct extensive experiments on the popular NYT dataset to evaluate the proposed framework, and observe consistent improvements over five strong baselines.