2021
DOI: 10.1049/ell2.12411
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

NA‐Reviewer: Reviewing the context to improve the error accumulation issue for multi‐hop QA

Abstract: The multi‐hop question answering (QA) task requires the machine to answer the question correctly and at the same time provide evidence clues. Some pipeline methods have achieved great results in answer accuracy and interpretability, while a obvious drawback of these pipeline methods is the error accumulation issue. In this letter, we propose a NA‐Reviewer method to improve the error accumulation issue in multi‐hop QA task. It consists of two parts: an NA‐Discriminator and a Reviewer, where the NA‐Discriminator… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
(43 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…CRERC (Fu et al, 2021a) is a pipeline model that includes three modules: relation extractor, reader, and comparator. NA-Reviewer (Fu et al, 2021b) is an improved version of CRERC, as it addresses the error accumulation issue. It is noted that both CRERC and NA-Reviewer models are evaluated on only 2Wiki.…”
Section: B3 Results Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…CRERC (Fu et al, 2021a) is a pipeline model that includes three modules: relation extractor, reader, and comparator. NA-Reviewer (Fu et al, 2021b) is an improved version of CRERC, as it addresses the error accumulation issue. It is noted that both CRERC and NA-Reviewer models are evaluated on only 2Wiki.…”
Section: B3 Results Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…EX(SA) (Trivedi et al, 2022b) decomposes a complex question into single-hop questions and builds a directed acyclic graph (DAG) for each singlehop reader (SA) to memorize the answer flow. NA-Reviewer (Fu et al, 2022) proposes a reviewer model that can fix the error prediction from incorrect evidence. We include FiD (Izacard and 2021) as the baseline End2End reader model.…”
Section: Baselinesmentioning
confidence: 99%