Enhancing NLP Robustness and Generalization through LLM-Generated Contrast Sets: A Scalable Framework for Systematic Evaluation and Adversarial Training

Hender Lin
3/9/2025
cs.CLcs.AIcs.LG

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 1 possible match can be shown below.

Abstract

Standard NLP benchmarks often fail to capture vulnerabilities stemming from dataset artifacts and spurious correlations. Contrast sets address this gap by challenging models near decision boundaries but are traditionally labor-intensive to create and limited in diversity. This study leverages large language models to automate the generation of diverse contrast sets. Using the SNLI dataset, we created a 3,000-example contrast set to evaluate and improve model robustness. Fine-tuning on these contrast sets enhanced performance on systematically perturbed examples, maintained standard test accuracy, and modestly improved generalization to novel perturbations. This automated approach offers a scalable solution for evaluating and improving NLP models, addressing systematic generalization challenges, and advancing robustness in real-world applications.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 1 weaker match is hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{lin2025enhancing,
  title  = {Enhancing NLP Robustness and Generalization through LLM-Generated Contrast Sets: A Scalable Framework for Systematic Evaluation and Adversarial Training},
  author = {Hender Lin},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2503.06648},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.06648v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2503.06648.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2503.06648)

Discussion