Building dense retrievers requires a series of standard procedures, including training and validating neural models and creating indexes for efficient search. However, these procedures are often misaligned in that training objectives do not exactly reflect the retrieval scenario at inference time. In this paper, we explore how the gap between training and inference in dense retrieval can be reduced, focusing on dense phrase retrieval (Lee et al., 2021) where billions of representations are indexed at inference. Since validating every dense retriever with a large-scale index is practically infeasible, we propose an efficient way of validating dense retrievers using a small subset of the entire corpus. This allows us to validate various training strategies including unifying contrastive loss terms and using hard negatives for phrase retrieval, which largely reduces the training-inference discrepancy. As a result, we improve top-1 phrase retrieval accuracy by 2~3 points and top-20 passage retrieval accuracy by 2~4 points for open-domain question answering. Our work urges modeling dense retrievers with careful consideration of training and inference via efficient validation while advancing phrase retrieval as a general solution for dense retrieval.

In this paper, we introduce a novel framework, SIMSEEK, (Simulating information-Seeking conversation from unlabeled documents), and compare its two variants. In our baseline SIMSEEK-SYM, a questioner generates follow-up questions upon the predetermined answer by an answerer. On the contrary, SIMSEEK-ASYM first generates the question and then finds its corresponding answer under the conversational context. Our experiments show that they can synthesize effective training resources for CQA and conversational search tasks. As a result, conversations from SIMSEEK-ASYM not only make more improvements in our experiments but also are favorably reviewed in a human evaluation. We finally release a large-scale resource of synthetic conversations, WIKI-SIMSEEK, containing 2 million CQA pairs built upon Wikipedia documents. With the dataset, our CQA model achieves state-of-the-art performance on a recent CQA benchmark, QuAC.

Question answering on knowledge bases (KBQA) poses a unique challenge for semantic parsing research due to two intertwined challenges: large search space and ambiguities in schema linking. Conventional ranking-based KBQA models, which rely on a candidate enumeration step to reduce the search space, struggle with flexibility in predicting complicated queries and have impractical running time. In this paper, we present ArcaneQA, a novel generation-based model that addresses both the large search space and the schema linking challenges in a unified framework with two mutually boosting ingredients: dynamic program induction for tackling the large search space and dynamic contextualized encoding for schema linking. Experimental results on multiple popular KBQA datasets demonstrate the highly competitive performance of ArcaneQA in both effectiveness and efficiency.

Performance in natural language processing, and specifically for the question-answer task, is typically measured by comparing a model\'s most confident (primary) prediction to golden answers (the ground truth). We are making the case that it is also useful to quantify how close a model came to predicting a correct answer even for examples that failed. We define the Golden Rank (GR) of an example as the rank of its most confident prediction that exactly matches a ground truth, and show why such a match always exists. For the 16 transformer models we analyzed, the majority of exactly matched golden answers in secondary prediction space hover very close to the top rank. We refer to secondary predictions as those ranking above 0 in descending confidence probability order. We demonstrate how the GR can be used to classify questions and visualize their spectrum of difficulty, from persistent near successes to persistent extreme failures. We derive a new aggregate statistic over entire test sets, named the Golden Rank Interpolated Median (GRIM) that quantifies the proximity of failed predictions to the top choice made by the model. To develop some intuition and explore the applicability of these metrics we use the Stanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD-2) and a few popular transformer models from the Hugging Face hub. We first demonstrate that the GRIM is not directly correlated with the F1 and exact match (EM) scores. We then calculate and visualize these scores for various transformer architectures, probe their applicability in error analysis by clustering failed predictions, and compare how they relate to other training diagnostics such as the EM and F1 scores. We finally suggest various research goals, such as broadening data collection for these metrics and their possible use in adversarial training.

Machine learning models are prone to overfitting their training (source) domains, which is commonly believed to be the reason why they falter in novel target domains. Here we examine the contrasting view that multi-source domain generalization (DG) is first and foremost a problem of mitigating source domain underfitting: models not adequately learning the signal already present in their multi-domain training data. Experiments on a reading comprehension DG benchmark show that as a model learns its source domains better -- using familiar methods such as knowledge distillation (KD) from a bigger model -- its zero-shot out-of-domain utility improves at an even faster pace. Improved source domain learning also demonstrates superior out-of-domain generalization over three popular existing DG approaches that aim to limit overfitting. Our implementation of KD-based domain generalization is available via PrimeQA at: https://ibm.biz/domain-generalization-with-kd.

Recent studies show that Question Answering (QA) based on Answer Sentence Selection (AS2) can be improved by generating an improved answer from the top-k ranked answer sentences (termed GenQA). This allows for synthesizing the information from multiple candidates into a concise, natural-sounding answer. However, creating large-scale supervised training data for GenQA models is very challenging. In this paper, we propose to train a GenQA model by transferring knowledge from a trained AS2 model, to overcome the aforementioned issue. First, we use an AS2 model to produce a ranking over answer candidates for a set of questions. Then, we use the top ranked candidate as the generation target, and the next k top ranked candidates as context for training a GenQA model. We also propose to use the AS2 model prediction scores for loss weighting and score-conditioned input/output shaping, to aid the knowledge transfer. Our evaluation on three public and one large industrial datasets demonstrates the superiority of our approach over the AS2 baseline, and GenQA trained using supervised data.

For users to trust model predictions, they need to understand model outputs, particularly their confidence - calibration aims to adjust (calibrate) models' confidence to match expected accuracy. We argue that the traditional calibration evaluation does not promote effective calibrations: for example, it can encourage always assigning a mediocre confidence score to all predictions, which does not help users distinguish correct predictions from wrong ones. Building on those observations, we propose a new calibration metric, MacroCE, that better captures whether the model assigns low confidence to wrong predictions and high confidence to correct predictions. Focusing on the practical application of open-domain question answering, we examine conventional calibration methods applied on the widely-used retriever-reader pipeline, all of which do not bring significant gains under our new MacroCE metric. Toward better calibration, we propose a new calibration method (ConsCal) that uses not just final model predictions but whether multiple model checkpoints make consistent predictions. Altogether, we provide an alternative view of calibration along with a new metric, re-evaluation of existing calibration methods on our metric, and proposal of a more effective calibration method.

We conduct a large empirical evaluation to investigate the landscape of distributional robustness in question answering. Our investigation spans over 350 models and 16 question answering datasets, including a diverse set of architectures, model sizes, and adaptation methods (e.g., fine-tuning, adapter tuning, in-context learning, etc.). We find that, in many cases, model variations do not affect robustness and in-distribution performance alone determines out-of-distribution performance. Moreover, our findings indicate that i) zero-shot and in-context learning methods are more robust to distribution shifts than fully fine-tuned models; ii) few-shot prompt fine-tuned models exhibit better robustness than few-shot fine-tuned span prediction models; iii) parameter-efficient and robustness enhancing training methods provide no significant robustness improvements. In addition, we publicly release all evaluations to encourage researchers to further analyze robustness trends for question answering models.

Fact-checking requires retrieving evidence related to a claim under investigation. The task can be formulated as question generation based on a claim, followed by question answering. However, recent question generation approaches assume that the answer is known and typically contained in a passage given as input, whereas such passages are what is being sought when verifying a claim. In this paper, we present {\it Varifocal}, a method that generates questions based on different focal points within a given claim, i.e.\ different spans of the claim and its metadata, such as its source and date. Our method outperforms previous work on a fact-checking question generation dataset on a wide range of automatic evaluation metrics. These results are corroborated by our manual evaluation, which indicates that our method generates more relevant and informative questions. We further demonstrate the potential of focal points in generating sets of clarification questions for product descriptions.

Knowledge underpins reasoning. Recent research demonstrates that when relevant knowledge is provided as additional context to commonsense question answering (QA), it can substantially enhance the performance even on top of state-of-the-art. The fundamental challenge is where and how to find such knowledge that is high quality and on point with respect to the question; knowledge retrieved from knowledge bases are incomplete and knowledge generated from language models are inconsistent. We present Rainier, or Reinforced Knowledge Introspector, that learns to generate contextually relevant knowledge in response to given questions. Our approach starts by imitating knowledge generated by GPT-3, then learns to generate its own knowledge via reinforcement learning where rewards are shaped based on the increased performance on the resulting question answering. Rainier demonstrates substantial and consistent performance gains when tested over 9 different commonsense benchmarks: including 5 datasets that are seen during model training, as well as 4 datasets that are kept unseen. Our work is the first to report that knowledge generated by models that are orders of magnitude smaller than GPT-3, even without direct supervision on the knowledge itself, can exceed the quality of commonsense knowledge elicited from GPT-3.