We introduce a high-quality dataset that contains 3,397 samples comprising (i) multiple choice questions, (ii) answers (including distractors), and (iii) their source documents, from the educational domain. Each question is phrased in two forms, normal and close. Correct answers are linked to source documents with sentence-level annotations. Thus, our versatile dataset can be used for both question and distractor generation, as well as to explore new challenges such as question format conversion. Furthermore, 903 questions are accompanied by their cognitive complexity level as per Bloom's taxonomy. All questions have been generated by educational experts rather than crowd workers to ensure they are maintaining educational and learning standards. Our analysis and experiments suggest distinguishable differences between our dataset and commonly used ones for question generation for educational purposes. We believe this new dataset can serve as a valuable resource for research and evaluation in the educational domain. The dataset and baselines will be released to support further research in question generation.

Charts are very popular to analyze data and convey important insights. People often analyze visualizations to answer open-ended questions that require explanatory answers. Answering such questions are often difficult and time-consuming as it requires a lot of cognitive and perceptual efforts. To address this challenge, we introduce a new task called OpenCQA, where the goal is to answer an open-ended question about a chart with descriptive texts. We present the annotation process and an in-depth analysis of our dataset. We implement and evaluate a set of baselines under three practical settings. In the first setting, a chart and the accompanying article is provided as input to the model. The second setting provides only the relevant paragraph(s) to the chart instead of the entire article, whereas the third setting requires the model to generate an answer solely based on the chart. Our analysis of the results show that the top performing models generally produce fluent and coherent text while they struggle to perform complex logical and arithmetic reasoning.

IBM yesterday announced it would be providing the AI brain for a robot being built by Airbus to accompany astronauts aboard the International Space Station (ISS). When only the best of the best will do, it looks like Watson has the right stuff. The robot, which looks like a flying volleyball with a low-resolution face, is being deployed with German astronaut Alexander Gerst in June for a six month mission. It's called CIMON, an acronym for Crew Interactive Mobile Companion, and it's headed to space to do science stuff. It'll help crew members conduct medical experiments, study crystals, and play with a Rubix cube.

Several multi-hop reading comprehension datasets have been proposed to resolve the issue of reasoning shortcuts by which questions can be answered without performing multi-hop reasoning. However, the ability of multi-hop models to perform step-by-step reasoning when finding an answer to a comparison question remains unclear. It is also unclear how questions about the internal reasoning process are useful for training and evaluating question-answering (QA) systems. To evaluate the model precisely in a hierarchical manner, we first propose a dataset, \textit{HieraDate}, with three probing tasks in addition to the main question: extraction, reasoning, and robustness. Our dataset is created by enhancing two previous multi-hop datasets, HotpotQA and 2WikiMultiHopQA, focusing on multi-hop questions on date information that involve both comparison and numerical reasoning. We then evaluate the ability of existing models to understand date information. Our experimental results reveal that the multi-hop models do not have the ability to subtract two dates even when they perform well in date comparison and number subtraction tasks. Other results reveal that our probing questions can help to improve the performance of the models (e.g., by +10.3 F1) on the main QA task and our dataset can be used for data augmentation to improve the robustness of the models.

Question Answering is a popular application of NLP. Transformer models trained on big datasets have dramatically improved the state-of-the-art results on Question Answering. The question answering task can be formulated in many ways. The most common application is an extractive question answering on a small context. The SQuAD dataset is a popular dataset where given a passage and a question, the model selects the word(s) representing the answer.

With the increasing importance of safety requirements associated with the use of black box models, evaluation of selective answering capability of models has been critical. Area under the curve (AUC) is used as a metric for this purpose. We find limitations in AUC; e.g., a model having higher AUC is not always better in performing selective answering. We propose three alternate metrics that fix the identified limitations. On experimenting with ten models, our results using the new metrics show that newer and larger pre-trained models do not necessarily show better performance in selective answering. We hope our insights will help develop better models tailored for safety-critical applications.

Models for Visual Question Answering (VQA) often rely on the spurious correlations, i.e., the language priors, that appear in the biased samples of training set, which make them brittle against the out-of-distribution (OOD) test data. Recent methods have achieved promising progress in overcoming this problem by reducing the impact of biased samples on model training. However, these models reveal a trade-off that the improvements on OOD data severely sacrifice the performance on the in-distribution (ID) data (which is dominated by the biased samples). Therefore, we propose a novel contrastive learning approach, MMBS, for building robust VQA models by Making the Most of Biased Samples. Specifically, we construct positive samples for contrastive learning by eliminating the information related to spurious correlation from the original training samples and explore several strategies to use the constructed positive samples for training. Instead of undermining the importance of biased samples in model training, our approach precisely exploits the biased samples for unbiased information that contributes to reasoning. The proposed method is compatible with various VQA backbones. We validate our contributions by achieving competitive performance on the OOD dataset VQA-CP v2 while preserving robust performance on the ID dataset VQA v2.

Conversational question generation (CQG) serves as a vital task for machines to assist humans, such as interactive reading comprehension, through conversations. Compared to traditional single-turn question generation (SQG), CQG is more challenging in the sense that the generated question is required not only to be meaningful, but also to align with the occurred conversation history. While previous studies mainly focus on how to model the flow and alignment of the conversation, there has been no thorough study to date on which parts of the context and history are necessary for the model. We argue that shortening the context and history is crucial as it can help the model to optimise more on the conversational alignment property. To this end, we propose CoHS-CQG, a two-stage CQG framework, which adopts a CoHS module to shorten the context and history of the input. In particular, CoHS selects contiguous sentences and history turns according to their relevance scores by a top-p strategy. Our model achieves state-of-the-art performances on CoQA in both the answer-aware and answer-unaware settings.

Question Generation (QG) aims to automate the task of composing questions for a passage with a set of chosen answers found within the passage. In recent years, the introduction of neural generation models has resulted in substantial improvements of automatically generated questions in terms of quality, especially compared to traditional approaches that employ manually crafted heuristics. However, the metrics commonly applied in QG evaluations have been criticized for their low agreement with human judgement. We therefore propose a new reference-free evaluation metric that has the potential to provide a better mechanism for evaluating QG systems, called QAScore. Instead of fine-tuning a language model to maximize its correlation with human judgements, QAScore evaluates a question by computing the cross entropy according to the probability that the language model can correctly generate the masked words in the answer to that question. Furthermore, we conduct a new crowd-sourcing human evaluation experiment for the QG evaluation to investigate how QAScore and other metrics can correlate with human judgements. Experiments show that QAScore obtains a stronger correlation with the results of our proposed human evaluation method compared to existing traditional word-overlap-based metrics such as BLEU and ROUGE, as well as the existing pretrained-model-based metric BERTScore.

Generative question answering (QA) models generate answers to questions either solely based on the parameters of the model (the closed-book setting) or additionally retrieving relevant evidence (the open-book setting). Generative QA models can answer some relatively complex questions, but the mechanism through which they do so is still poorly understood. We perform several studies aimed at better understanding the multi-hop reasoning capabilities of generative QA models. First, we decompose multi-hop questions into multiple corresponding single-hop questions, and find marked inconsistency in QA models' answers on these pairs of ostensibly identical question chains. Second, we find that models lack zero-shot multi-hop reasoning ability: when trained only on single-hop questions, models generalize poorly to multi-hop questions. Finally, we demonstrate that it is possible to improve models' zero-shot multi-hop reasoning capacity through two methods that approximate real multi-hop natural language (NL) questions by training on either concatenation of single-hop questions or logical forms (SPARQL). In sum, these results demonstrate that multi-hop reasoning does not emerge naturally in generative QA models, but can be encouraged by advances in training or modeling techniques.