-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 216
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Support for multiple references per candidate #30
Comments
hi @feralvam, internally bertscore caches the computed representations of encountered sentences. This means that if you have duplicated sentences, our package will reuse the cached vectors to compute bertscore. For multi-reference setting, you can simply repeat the candidate sentences for a couple times. This should be efficient. That being said, I look forward to having a convenient interface to handle multiple references. Feel free to open a PR if you want to contribute. |
This issue will be addressed in the next version of this repo, which is likely going to happen by the end of February. |
@Tiiiger thanks for the awesome repository. Could you clarify the usage of multiple references? From the demo notebook (cell 15 https://github.com/Tiiiger/bert_score/blob/master/example/Demo.ipynb), I believe the usage should be:
I tried a naive example with one reference passed as multi reference.
However, this gives a RunTime error:
It seems both Thank you for your patience. |
Hi @TheShadow29, |
Thanks a lot @felixgwu for the prompt response. |
Hi,
Thank you for the good work. I was checking the code and, as far I could understand, there is an underlying assumption that there is only one single reference per candidate. Am I correct or am I missing something?
I'm working on a task (sentence simplification) for which we have valid and test sets with multiple references. I was thinking of trying out BERTScore there and make the appropriate modifications for the multi-reference scenario, but I wanted to check first in case there was something already implemented on that line of work that I hadn't noticed.
Thanks.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: