Trustworthy answer content is abundant in many high-resource languages and is instantly accessible through question answering systems, yet this content can be hard to access for those that do not speak these languages. The leap forward in cross-lingual modeling quality offered by generative language models offers much promise, yet their raw generations often fall short in factuality. To improve trustworthiness in these systems, a promising direction is to attribute the answer to a retrieved source, possibly in a content-rich language different from the query. Our work is the first to study attribution for cross-lingual question answering. First, we collect data in 5 languages to assess the attribution level of a state-of-the-art cross-lingual QA system. To our surprise, we find that a substantial portion of the answers is not attributable to any retrieved passages (up to 50% of answers exactly matching a gold reference) despite the system being able to attend directly to the retrieved text. Second, to address this poor attribution level, we experiment with a wide range of attribution detection techniques. We find that Natural Language Inference models and PaLM 2 fine-tuned on a very small amount of attribution data can accurately detect attribution. Based on these models, we improve the attribution level of a cross-lingual question-answering system. Overall, we show that current academic generative cross-lingual QA systems have substantial shortcomings in attribution and we build tooling to mitigate these issues.

Eliciting feedback from end users of NLP models can be beneficial for improving models. However, how should we present model responses to users so they are most amenable to be corrected from user feedback? Further, what properties do users value to understand and trust responses? We answer these questions by analyzing the effect of rationales generated by QA models to support their answers. We specifically consider decomposed question-answering models that first extract an intermediate rationale based on a context and a question and then use solely this rationale to answer the question. A rationale outlines the approach followed by the model to answer the question. Our work considers various formats of these rationales that vary according to well-defined properties of interest. We sample these rationales from large language models using few-shot prompting for two reading comprehension datasets, and then perform two user studies. In the first one, we present users with incorrect answers and corresponding rationales of various formats and ask them to provide natural language feedback to revise the rationale. We then measure the effectiveness of this feedback in patching these rationales through in-context learning. The second study evaluates how well different rationale formats enable users to understand and trust model answers, when they are correct. We find that rationale formats significantly affect how easy it is (1) for users to give feedback for rationales, and (2) for models to subsequently execute this feedback. In addition to influencing critiquablity, certain formats significantly enhance user reported understanding and trust of model outputs.

Questions posed by information-seeking users often contain implicit false or potentially harmful assumptions. In a high-risk domain such as maternal and infant health, a question-answering system must recognize these pragmatic constraints and go beyond simply answering user questions, examining them in context to respond helpfully. To achieve this, we study pragmatic inferences made when mothers ask questions about pregnancy and infant care. Some of the inferences in these questions evade detection by existing methods, risking the possibility of QA systems failing to address them which can have dangerous health and policy implications. We explore the viability of detecting inferences from questions using large language models and illustrate that informing existing QA pipelines with pragmatic inferences produces responses that can mitigate the propagation of harmful beliefs.

Task-oriented dialogue (ToD) systems help users execute well-defined tasks across a variety of domains (e.g., $\textit{flight booking}$ or $\textit{food ordering}$), with their Natural Language Understanding (NLU) components being dedicated to the analysis of user utterances, predicting users' intents ($\textit{Intent Detection}$, ID) and extracting values for informational slots ($\textit{Value Extraction}$, VE). In most domains, labelled NLU data is scarce, making sample-efficient learning -- enabled with effective transfer paradigms -- paramount. In this work, we introduce SQATIN, a new framework for dialog NLU based on (i) instruction tuning and (ii) question-answering-based formulation of ID and VE tasks. According to the evaluation on established NLU benchmarks, SQATIN sets the new state of the art in dialogue NLU, substantially surpassing the performance of current models based on standard fine-tuning objectives in both in-domain training and cross-domain transfer. SQATIN yields particularly large performance gains in cross-domain transfer, owing to the fact that our QA-based instruction tuning leverages similarities between natural language descriptions of classes (i.e., slots and intents) across domains.

Long-form question answering (LFQA) poses a challenge as it involves generating detailed answers in the form of paragraphs, which go beyond simple yes/no responses or short factual answers. While existing QA models excel in questions with concise answers, LFQA requires handling multiple topics and their intricate relationships, demanding comprehensive explanations. Previous attempts at LFQA focused on generating long-form answers by utilizing relevant contexts from a corpus, relying solely on the question itself. However, they overlooked the possibility that the question alone might not provide sufficient information to identify the relevant contexts. Additionally, generating detailed long-form answers often entails aggregating knowledge from diverse sources. To address these limitations, we propose an LFQA model with iterative Planning, Retrieval, and Generation. This iterative process continues until a complete answer is generated for the given question. From an extensive experiment on both an open domain and a technical domain QA dataset, we find that our model outperforms the state-of-the-art models on various textual and factual metrics for the LFQA task.

Multilingual pre-trained language models are incredibly effective at Question Answering (QA), a core task in Natural Language Understanding, achieving high accuracies on several multilingual benchmarks. However, little is known about how well they are calibrated. In this paper, we study the calibration properties of several pre-trained multilingual large language models (LLMs) on a variety of question-answering tasks. We perform extensive experiments, spanning both extractive and generative QA model designs and diverse languages, spanning both high-resource and low-resource ones. We study different dimensions of calibration in in-distribution, out-of-distribution, and cross-lingual transfer settings, and investigate strategies to improve it, including post-hoc methods and regularized fine-tuning. We demonstrate automatically translated data augmentation as a highly effective technique to improve model calibration. We also conduct a number of ablation experiments to study the effect of model size on calibration and how multilingual models compare with their monolingual counterparts for diverse tasks and languages.

When a model is trying to gather information in an interactive setting, it benefits from asking informative questions. However, in the case of a grounded multi-turn image identification task, previous studies have been constrained to polar yes/no questions, limiting how much information the model can gain in a single turn. We present an approach that formulates more informative, open-ended questions. In doing so, we discover that off-the-shelf visual question answering (VQA) models often make presupposition errors, which standard information gain question selection methods fail to account for. To address this issue, we propose a method that can incorporate presupposition handling into both question selection and belief updates. Specifically, we use a two-stage process, where the model first filters out images which are irrelevant to a given question, then updates its beliefs about which image the user intends. Through self-play and human evaluations, we show that our method is successful in asking informative open-ended questions, increasing accuracy over the past state-of-the-art by 14%, while resulting in 48% more efficient games in human evaluations.

Trustworthy language models should abstain from answering questions when they do not know the answer. However, the answer to a question can be unknown for a variety of reasons. Prior research has focused on the case in which the question is clear and the answer is unambiguous but possibly unknown, but the answer to a question can also be unclear due to uncertainty of the questioner's intent or context. We investigate question answering from this perspective, focusing on answering a subset of questions with a high degree of accuracy, from a set of questions in which many are inherently ambiguous. In this setting, we find that the most reliable approach to decide when to abstain involves quantifying repetition within sampled model outputs, rather than the model's likelihood or self-verification as used in prior work. We find this to be the case across different types of uncertainty and model scales,and with or without instruction tuning. Our results suggest that sampling-based confidence scores help calibrate answers to relatively unambiguous questions, with more dramatic improvements on ambiguous questions.

Enterprise applications of Large Language Models (LLMs) hold promise for question answering on enterprise SQL databases. However, the extent to which LLMs can accurately respond to enterprise questions in such databases remains unclear, given the absence of suitable Text-to-SQL benchmarks tailored to enterprise settings. Additionally, the potential of Knowledge Graphs (KGs) to enhance LLM-based question answering by providing business context is not well understood. This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of LLM-powered question answering systems in the context of enterprise questions and SQL databases, while also exploring the role of knowledge graphs in improving accuracy. To achieve this, we introduce a benchmark comprising an enterprise SQL schema in the insurance domain, a range of enterprise queries encompassing reporting to metrics, and a contextual layer incorporating an ontology and mappings that define a knowledge graph. Our primary finding reveals that question answering using GPT-4, with zero-shot prompts directly on SQL databases, achieves an accuracy of 16%. Notably, this accuracy increases to 54% when questions are posed over a Knowledge Graph representation of the enterprise SQL database. Therefore, investing in Knowledge Graph provides higher accuracy for LLM powered question answering systems.

Information-seeking questions in long-form question answering (LFQA) often prove misleading due to ambiguity or false presupposition in the question. While many existing approaches handle misleading questions, they are tailored to limited questions, which are insufficient in a real-world setting with unpredictable input characteristics. In this work, we propose PreWoMe, a unified approach capable of handling any type of information-seeking question. The key idea of PreWoMe involves extracting presuppositions in the question and exploiting them as working memory to generate feedback and action about the question. Our experiment shows that PreWoMe is effective not only in tackling misleading questions but also in handling normal ones, thereby demonstrating the effectiveness of leveraging presuppositions, feedback, and action for real-world QA settings.