We introduce two novel methods, Tree-Search and Self-contextualizing QA, designed to enhance the performance of large language models (LLMs) in question-answering tasks. Tree-Search is a sampling technique specifically created to extract diverse information from an LLM for a given prompt. Self-contextualizing QA leverages Tree-Search to enable the model to create its own context using a wide range of information relevant to the prompt, evaluate it explicitly and return a open book answer to the initial prompt . We demonstrate that the quality of generated answers improves according to various metrics, including accuracy, informativeness, coherence, and consistency, as evaluated by GPT3.5(text-davinci-003). Furthermore, we show that our methods result in increased robustness and that performance is positively correlated with tree size, benefiting both answer quality and robustness. Finally, we discuss other promising applications of Tree-Search, highlighting its potential to enhance a broad range of tasks beyond question-answering. \noindent We also discuss several areas for future work, including refining the Tree-Search and Self-Contextualizing QA methods, improving the coherence of the generated context, and investigating the impact of bootstrapping on model robustness

Recent advancements in open-domain question answering (ODQA), i.e., finding answers from large open-domain corpus like Wikipedia, have led to human-level performance on many datasets. However, progress in QA over book stories (Book QA) lags behind despite its similar task formulation to ODQA. This work provides a comprehensive and quantitative analysis about the difficulty of Book QA: (1) We benchmark the research on the NarrativeQA dataset with extensive experiments with cutting-edge ODQA techniques. This quantifies the challenges Book QA poses, as well as advances the published state-of-the-art with a $\sim$7\% absolute improvement on Rouge-L. (2) We further analyze the detailed challenges in Book QA through human studies.\footnote{\url{https://github.com/gorov/BookQA}.} Our findings indicate that the event-centric questions dominate this task, which exemplifies the inability of existing QA models to handle event-oriented scenarios.