Paper detail

Match$^2$: A Matching over Matching Model for Similar Question Identification

Community Question Answering (CQA) has become a primary means for people to acquire knowledge, where people are free to ask questions or submit answers. To enhance the efficiency of the service, similar question identification becomes a core task in CQA which aims to find a similar question from the archived repository whenever a new question is asked. However, it has long been a challenge to properly measure the similarity between two questions due to the inherent variation of natural language, i.e., there could be different ways to ask a same question or different questions sharing similar expressions. To alleviate this problem, it is natural to involve the existing answers for the enrichment of the archived questions. Traditional methods typically take a one-side usage, which leverages the answer as some expanded representation of the corresponding question. Unfortunately, this may introduce unexpected noises into the similarity computation since answers are often long and diverse, leading to inferior performance. In this work, we propose a two-side usage, which leverages the answer as a bridge of the two questions. The key idea is based on our observation that similar questions could be addressed by similar parts of the answer while different questions may not. In other words, we can compare the matching patterns of the two questions over the same answer to measure their similarity. In this way, we propose a novel matching over matching model, namely Match$^2$, which compares the matching patterns between two question-answer pairs for similar question identification. Empirical experiments on two benchmark datasets demonstrate that our model can significantly outperform previous state-of-the-art methods on the similar question identification task.

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.