Papers › Probing the Robustness of Pre-trained Language Models for Entity Matching

Probing the Robustness of Pre-trained Language Models for Entity Matching

1 Oct 2022ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management (CIKM) 2022 10archive 2025-07-28

Mehdi Akbarian Rastaghi, Ehsan Kamalloo, Davood Rafiei

The paradigm of fine-tuning Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs) has been successful in Entity Matching (EM). Despite their remarkable performance, PLMs exhibit tendency to learn spurious correlations from training data. In this work, we aim at investigating whether PLM-based entity matching models can be trusted in real-world applications where data distribution is different from that of training. To this end, we design an evaluation benchmark to assess the robustness of EM models to facilitate their deployment in the real-world settings. Our assessments reveal that data imbalance in the training data is a key problem for robustness. We also find that data augmentation alone is not sufficient to make a model robust. As a remedy, we prescribe simple modifications that can improve the robustness of PLM-based EM models. Our experiments show that while yielding superior results for in-domain generalization, our proposed model significantly improves the model robustness, compared to state-of-the-art EM models.

PaperPDFCode

Code

makbn/robem mentioned in paperpytorch 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

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Data AugmentationDomain GeneralizationEntity Resolution

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

TaskDatasetModelMetricValueRank at snapshotLeaderboardReport
Entity Resolution Abt-Buy RobEM F1 (%) 90.90 #5 of 16 Archive leaderboard report
Entity Resolution Amazon-Google RobEM F1 (%) 79.06 #4 of 17 Archive leaderboard report

Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.

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