Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2020 · 66 citations · 39 references
ComputingComputer ScienceComputational LinguisticsNatural Language ProcessingReading ComprehensionLanguage ModelingLanguage ModelsNatural Language UnderstandingQuestion AnsweringReadingAblation StudiesComparison Of Content WordsLanguage UnderstandingMachine Reading ComprehensionQuestion Answering SystemsQuestion Answering Systems Evaluation
Existing analysis work in machine reading comprehension (MRC) is largely concerned with evaluating the capabilities of systems. However, the capabilities of datasets are not assessed for benchmarking language understanding precisely. We propose a semi-automated, ablation-based methodology for this challenge; By checking whether questions can be solved even after removing features associated with a skill requisite for language understanding, we evaluate to what degree the questions do not require the skill. Experiments on 10 datasets (e.g., CoQA, SQuAD v2.0, and RACE) with a strong baseline model show that, for example, the relative scores of the baseline model provided with content words only and with shuffled sentence words in the context are on average 89.2% and 78.5% of the original scores, respectively. These results suggest that most of the questions already answered correctly by the model do not necessarily require grammatical and complex reasoning. For precise benchmarking, MRC datasets will need to take extra care in their design to ensure that questions can correctly evaluate the intended skills.
39
The Stanford CoreNLP Natural Language Processing Toolkit
Christopher D. Manning, Mihai Surdeanu, John Bauer et al. · 2014 · 7.2K citations · Full text
SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Text
Pranav Rajpurkar, Jian Zhang, Konstantin Lopyrev et al. · 2016 · 6.3K citations · Full text
Know What You Don’t Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuAD
Pranav Rajpurkar, Robin Jia, Percy Liang · 2018 · 2.2K citations · Full text