Paper detail

Interpretable AMR-Based Question Decomposition for Multi-hop Question Answering

Effective multi-hop question answering (QA) requires reasoning over multiple scattered paragraphs and providing explanations for answers. Most existing approaches cannot provide an interpretable reasoning process to illustrate how these models arrive at an answer. In this paper, we propose a Question Decomposition method based on Abstract Meaning Representation (QDAMR) for multi-hop QA, which achieves interpretable reasoning by decomposing a multi-hop question into simpler sub-questions and answering them in order. Since annotating the decomposition is expensive, we first delegate the complexity of understanding the multi-hop question to an AMR parser. We then achieve the decomposition of a multi-hop question via segmentation of the corresponding AMR graph based on the required reasoning type. Finally, we generate sub-questions using an AMR-to-Text generation model and answer them with an off-the-shelf QA model. Experimental results on HotpotQA demonstrate that our approach is competitive for interpretable reasoning and that the sub-questions generated by QDAMR are well-formed, outperforming existing question-decomposition-based multi-hop QA approaches.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.