Papers › ER-Test: Evaluating Explanation Regularization Methods for Language Models

ER-Test: Evaluating Explanation Regularization Methods for Language Models

25 May 2022arXiv:2205.12542archive 2025-07-28

Brihi Joshi, Aaron Chan, Ziyi Liu, Shaoliang Nie, Maziar Sanjabi, Hamed Firooz, Xiang Ren

By explaining how humans would solve a given task, human rationales can provide strong learning signal for neural language models (LMs). Explanation regularization (ER) aims to improve LM generalization by pushing the LM's machine rationales (Which input tokens did the LM focus on?) to align with human rationales (Which input tokens would humans focus on?). Though prior works primarily study ER via in-distribution (ID) evaluation, out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization is often more critical in real-world scenarios, yet ER's effect on OOD generalization has been underexplored. In this paper, we introduce ER-Test, a framework for evaluating ER models' OOD generalization along three dimensions: unseen dataset tests, contrast set tests, and functional tests. Using ER-Test, we extensively analyze how ER models' OOD generalization varies with different ER design choices. Across two tasks and six datasets, ER-Test shows that ER has little impact on ID performance but can yield large OOD performance gains. Also, we find that ER can improve OOD performance even with limited rationale supervision. ER-Test's results help demonstrate ER's utility and establish best practices for using ER effectively.

PaperPDFCodeCode Syntology ran

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2205.12542")

Code

Syntology Ran 3 of 3 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · our draft was wrong; 1 ran · fixture could not drive it.

By repository: official repository: 1 sample from 1 repository, 1 ran; 2 identical to code first harvested elsewhere. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

ink-usc/er-test officialmentioned in paperpytorchMIT report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

3 samples harvested; 3 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

2ran · our draft was wrong
1ran · fixture could not drive it

Licence: 2 of the 3 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from ink-usc/er-test. Some samples are identical code Syntology first harvested from another repository; for those, this paper's copy is not located and its licence is not recorded. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

stratified_sampling ink-usc/er-test/scripts/build_dataset.py official repository ran · fixture could not drive it MIT (permissive) · 433a105bae23d94f · report
align_rationale_with_tokens identical code first harvested elsewhere ran · our draft was wrong licence of this copy not recorded · 0a8da4fad887581e · report
update_dataset_dict identical code first harvested elsewhere ran · our draft was wrong licence of this copy not recorded · 3b27b863577b7303 · report

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

ALIGN

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections