Alongside huge volumes of research on deep learning models in NLP in the recent years, there has been also much work on benchmark datasets needed to track modeling progress. Question answering and reading comprehension have been particularly prolific in this regard, with over 80 new datasets appearing in the past two years. This study is the largest survey of the field to date. We provide an overview of the various formats and domains of the current resources, highlighting the current lacunae for future work. We further discuss the current classifications of ``reasoning types" in question answering and propose a new taxonomy. We also discuss the implications of over-focusing on English, and survey the current monolingual resources for other languages and multilingual resources. The study is aimed at both practitioners looking for pointers to the wealth of existing data, and at researchers working on new resources.
Making controlled perturbations is essential for various tasks (e.g., data augmentation), but building task-specific generators can be expensive. We introduce Tailor, a task-agnostic generation system that perturbs text in a semantically-controlled way. With unlikelihood training, we design Tailor's generator to follow a series of control codes derived from semantic roles. Through modifications of these control codes, Tailor can produce fine-grained perturbations. We implement a set of operations on control codes that can be composed into complex perturbation strategies, and demonstrate their effectiveness in three distinct applications: First, Tailor facilitates the construction of high-quality contrast sets that are lexically diverse, and less biased than original task test data. Second, paired with automated labeling heuristics, Tailor helps improve model generalization through data augmentation: We obtain an average gain of 1.73 on an NLI challenge set by perturbing just 5% of training data. Third, without any finetuning overhead, Tailor's perturbations effectively improve compositionality in fine-grained style transfer, outperforming fine-tuned baselines on 6 transfers.
The predominant challenge in weakly supervised semantic parsing is that of spurious programs that evaluate to correct answers for the wrong reasons. Prior work uses elaborate search strategies to mitigate the prevalence of spurious programs; however, they typically consider only one input at a time. In this work we explore the use of consistency between the output programs for related inputs to reduce the impact of spurious programs. We bias the program search (and thus the model's training signal) towards programs that map the same phrase in related inputs to the same sub-parts in their respective programs. Additionally, we study the importance of designing logical formalisms that facilitate this kind of consAistency-based training. We find that a more consistent formalism leads to improved model performance even without consistency-based training. When combined together, these two insights lead to a 10% absolute improvement over the best prior result on the Natural Language Visual Reasoning dataset.
Readers of academic research papers often read with the goal of answering specific questions. Question Answering systems that can answer those questions can make consumption of the content much more efficient. However, building such tools requires data that reflect the difficulty of the task arising from complex reasoning about claims made in multiple parts of a paper. In contrast, existing information-seeking question answering datasets usually contain questions about generic factoid-type information. We therefore present QASPER, a dataset of 5,049 questions over 1,585 Natural Language Processing papers. Each question is written by an NLP practitioner who read only the title and abstract of the corresponding paper, and the question seeks information present in the full text. The questions are then answered by a separate set of NLP practitioners who also provide supporting evidence to answers. We find that existing models that do well on other QA tasks do not perform well on answering these questions, underperforming humans by at least 27 F1 points when answering them from entire papers, motivating further research in document-grounded, information-seeking QA, which our dataset is designed to facilitate.
As language models are trained on ever more text, researchers are turning to some of the largest corpora available. Unlike most other types of datasets in NLP, large unlabeled text corpora are often presented with minimal documentation, and best practices for documenting them have not been established. In this work we provide the first documentation for the Colossal Clean Crawled Corpus (C4; Raffel et al., 2020), a dataset created by applying a set of filters to a single snapshot of Common Crawl. We begin with a high-level summary of the data, including distributions of where the text came from and when it was written. We then give more detailed analysis on salient parts of this data, including the most frequent sources of text (e.g., patents.google.com, which contains a significant percentage of machine translated and/or OCR'd text), the effect that the filters had on the data (they disproportionately remove text in AAE), and evidence that some other benchmark NLP dataset examples are contained in the text. We release a web interface to an interactive, indexed copy of this dataset, encouraging the community to continuously explore and report additional findings.
Compositional reasoning tasks like multi-hop question answering, require making latent decisions to get the final answer, given a question. However, crowdsourced datasets often capture only a slice of the underlying task distribution, which can induce unanticipated biases in models performing compositional reasoning. Furthermore, discriminatively trained models exploit such biases to get a better held-out performance, without learning the right way to reason, as they do not necessitate paying attention to the question representation (conditioning variable) in its entirety, to estimate the answer likelihood. In this work, we propose a generative context selection model for multi-hop question answering that reasons about how the given question could have been generated given a context pair. While being comparable to the state-of-the-art answering performance, our proposed generative passage selection model has a better performance (4.9% higher than baseline) on adversarial held-out set which tests robustness of model's multi-hop reasoning capabilities.
When training most modern reading comprehension models, all the questions associated with a context are treated as being independent from each other. However, closely related questions and their corresponding answers are not independent, and leveraging these relationships could provide a strong supervision signal to a model. Drawing on ideas from contrastive estimation, we introduce several new supervision techniques that compare question-answer scores across multiple related instances. Specifically, we normalize these scores across various neighborhoods of closely contrasting questions and/or answers, adding another cross entropy loss term that is used in addition to traditional maximum likelihood estimation. Our techniques require bundles of related question-answer pairs, which we can either mine from within existing data or create using various automated heuristics. We empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of training with instance bundles on two datasets -- HotpotQA and ROPES -- showing up to 11% absolute gains in accuracy.
Much recent work in NLP has documented dataset artifacts, bias, and spurious correlations between input features and output labels. However, how to tell which features have "spurious" instead of legitimate correlations is typically left unspecified. In this work we argue that for complex language understanding tasks, all simple feature correlations are spurious, and we formalize this notion into a class of problems which we call competency problems. For example, the word "amazing" on its own should not give information about a sentiment label independent of the context in which it appears, which could include negation, metaphor, sarcasm, etc. We theoretically analyze the difficulty of creating data for competency problems when human bias is taken into account, showing that realistic datasets will increasingly deviate from competency problems as dataset size increases. This analysis gives us a simple statistical test for dataset artifacts, which we use to show more subtle biases than were described in prior work, including demonstrating that models are inappropriately affected by these less extreme biases. Our theoretical treatment of this problem also allows us to analyze proposed solutions, such as making local edits to dataset instances, and to give recommendations for future data collection and model design efforts that target competency problems.
Compositional, structured models are appealing because they explicitly decompose problems and provide interpretable intermediate outputs that give confidence that the model is not simply latching onto data artifacts. Learning these models is challenging, however, because end-task supervision only provides a weak indirect signal on what values the latent decisions should take. This often results in the model failing to learn to perform the intermediate tasks correctly. In this work, we introduce a way to leverage paired examples that provide stronger cues for learning latent decisions. When two related training examples share internal substructure, we add an additional training objective to encourage consistency between their latent decisions. Such an objective does not require external supervision for the values of the latent output, or even the end task, yet provides an additional training signal to that provided by individual training examples themselves. We apply our method to improve compositional question answering using neural module networks on the DROP dataset. We explore three ways to acquire paired questions in DROP: (a) discovering naturally occurring paired examples within the dataset, (b) constructing paired examples using templates, and (c) generating paired examples using a question generation model. We empirically demonstrate that our proposed approach improves both in- and out-of-distribution generalization and leads to correct latent decision predictions.
Question Answering (QA) tasks requiring information from multiple documents often rely on a retrieval model to identify relevant information from which the reasoning model can derive an answer. The retrieval model is typically trained to maximize the likelihood of the labeled supporting evidence. However, when retrieving from large text corpora such as Wikipedia, the correct answer can often be obtained from multiple evidence candidates, not all of them labeled as positive, thus rendering the training signal weak and noisy. The problem is exacerbated when the questions are unanswerable or the answers are boolean, since the models cannot rely on lexical overlap to map answers to supporting evidences. We develop a new parameterization of set-valued retrieval that properly handles unanswerable queries, and we show that marginalizing over this set during training allows a model to mitigate false negatives in annotated supporting evidences. We test our method with two multi-document QA datasets, IIRC and HotpotQA. On IIRC, we show that joint modeling with marginalization on alternative contexts improves model performance by 5.5 F1 points and achieves a new state-of-the-art performance of 50.6 F1. We also show that marginalization results in 0.9 to 1.6 QA F1 improvement on HotpotQA in various settings.