Paper detail

What Question Answering can Learn from Trivia Nerds

In addition to the traditional task of getting machines to answer questions, a major research question in question answering is to create interesting, challenging questions that can help systems learn how to answer questions and also reveal which systems are the best at answering questions. We argue that creating a question answering dataset -- and the ubiquitous leaderboard that goes with it -- closely resembles running a trivia tournament: you write questions, have agents (either humans or machines) answer the questions, and declare a winner. However, the research community has ignored the decades of hard-learned lessons from decades of the trivia community creating vibrant, fair, and effective question answering competitions. After detailing problems with existing QA datasets, we outline the key lessons -- removing ambiguity, discriminating skill, and adjudicating disputes -- that can transfer to QA research and how they might be implemented for the QA community.

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.