Paper detail

How Additional Knowledge can Improve Natural Language Commonsense Question Answering?

Recently several datasets have been proposed to encourage research in Question Answering domains where commonsense knowledge is expected to play an important role. Recent language models such as ROBERTA, BERT and GPT that have been pre-trained on Wikipedia articles and books have shown reasonable performance with little fine-tuning on several such Multiple Choice Question-Answering (MCQ) datasets. Our goal in this work is to develop methods to incorporate additional (commonsense) knowledge into language model-based approaches for better question-answering in such domains. In this work, we first categorize external knowledge sources, and show performance does improve on using such sources. We then explore three different strategies for knowledge incorporation and four different models for question-answering using external commonsense knowledge. We analyze our predictions to explore the scope of further improvements.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.