No Arabic abstract
Short text matching often faces the challenges that there are great word mismatch and expression diversity between the two texts, which would be further aggravated in languages like Chinese where there is no natural space to segment words explicitly. In this paper, we propose a novel lattice based CNN model (LCNs) to utilize multi-granularity information inherent in the word lattice while maintaining strong ability to deal with the introduced noisy information for matching based question answering in Chinese. We conduct extensive experiments on both document based question answering and knowledge based question answering tasks, and experimental results show that the LCNs models can significantly outperform the state-of-the-art matching models and strong baselines by taking advantages of better ability to distill rich but discriminative information from the word lattice input.
Unsupervised commonsense question answering is appealing since it does not rely on any labeled task data. Among existing work, a popular solution is to use pre-trained language models to score candidate choices directly conditioned on the question or context. However, such scores from language models can be easily affected by irrelevant factors, such as word frequencies, sentence structures, etc. These distracting factors may not only mislead the model to choose a wrong answer but also make it oversensitive to lexical perturbations in candidate answers. In this paper, we present a novel SEmantic-based Question Answering method (SEQA) for unsupervised commonsense question answering. Instead of directly scoring each answer choice, our method first generates a set of plausible answers with generative models (e.g., GPT-2), and then uses these plausible answers to select the correct choice by considering the semantic similarity between each plausible answer and each choice. We devise a simple, yet sound formalism for this idea and verify its effectiveness and robustness with extensive experiments. We evaluate the proposed method on four benchmark datasets, and our method achieves the best results in unsupervised settings. Moreover, when attacked by TextFooler with synonym replacement, SEQA demonstrates much less performance drops than baselines, thereby indicating stronger robustness.
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.
Every day, thousands of customers post questions on Amazon product pages. After some time, if they are fortunate, a knowledgeable customer might answer their question. Observing that many questions can be answered based upon the available product reviews, we propose the task of review-based QA. Given a corpus of reviews and a question, the QA system synthesizes an answer. To this end, we introduce a new dataset and propose a method that combines information retrieval techniques for selecting relevant reviews (given a question) and reading comprehension models for synthesizing an answer (given a question and review). Our dataset consists of 923k questions, 3.6M answers and 14M reviews across 156k products. Building on the well-known Amazon dataset, we collect additional annotations, marking each question as either answerable or unanswerable based on the available reviews. A deployed system could first classify a question as answerable and then attempt to generate an answer. Notably, unlike many popular QA datasets, here, the questions, passages, and answers are all extracted from real human interactions. We evaluate numerous models for answer generation and propose strong baselines, demonstrating the challenging nature of this new task.
Current pre-trained language models have lots of knowledge, but a more limited ability to use that knowledge. Blooms Taxonomy helps educators teach children how to use knowledge by categorizing comprehension skills, so we use it to analyze and improve the comprehension skills of large pre-trained language models. Our experiments focus on zero-shot question answering, using the taxonomy to provide proximal context that helps the model answer questions by being relevant to those questions. We show targeting context in this manner improves performance across 4 popular common sense question answer datasets.
Knowledge-dependent tasks typically use two sources of knowledge: parametric, learned at training time, and contextual, given as a passage at inference time. To understand how models use these sources together, we formalize the problem of knowledge conflicts, where the contextual information contradicts the learned information. Analyzing the behaviour of popular models, we measure their over-reliance on memorized information (the cause of hallucinations), and uncover important factors that exacerbate this behaviour. Lastly, we propose a simple method to mitigate over-reliance on parametric knowledge, which minimizes hallucination, and improves out-of-distribution generalization by 4%-7%. Our findings demonstrate the importance for practitioners to evaluate model tendency to hallucinate rather than read, and show that our mitigation strategy encourages generalization to evolving information (i.e., time-dependent queries). To encourage these practices, we have released our framework for generating knowledge conflicts.