mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

How Optimal is Greedy Decoding for Extractive Question Answering?

arXiv 2108.05857 ↗First posted 12 Aug 2021cs.CLcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Fine-tuned language models use greedy decoding to answer reading comprehension questions with relative success. However, this approach does not ensure that the answer is a span in the given passage, nor does it guarantee that it is the most probable one. Does greedy decoding actually perform worse than an algorithm that does adhere to these properties? To study the performance and optimality of greedy decoding, we present exact-extract, a decoding algorithm that efficiently finds the most probable answer span in the context. We compare the performance of T5 with both decoding algorithms on zero-shot and few-shot extractive question answering. When no training examples are available, exact-extract significantly outperforms greedy decoding. However, greedy decoding quickly converges towards the performance of exact-extract with the introduction of a few training examples, becoming more extractive and increasingly likelier to generate the most probable span as the training set grows. We also show that self-supervised training can bias the model towards extractive behavior, increasing performance in the zero-shot setting without resorting to annotated examples. Overall, our results suggest that pretrained language models are so good at adapting to extractive question answering, that it is often enough to fine-tune on a small training set for the greedy algorithm to emulate the optimal decoding strategy.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Aug 2021.

Builds on

29 of 36 references.

References · 29

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  3. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,599
  4. 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,893
  5. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
  6. 2020Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 3,824
  7. 2018HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answeringcited by 3,754
  8. 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,955
  9. 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,918
  10. 2018SentencePiece: A simple and language independent subword tokenizer and detokenizer for Neural Text Processingcited by 1,989
  11. 2020Making Pre-trained Language Models Better Few-shot Learnerscited by 1,256
  12. 2020Leveraging Passage Retrieval with Generative Models for Open Domain Question Answeringcited by 1,210
17 more
  1. 2020Exploiting Cloze Questions for Few Shot Text Classification and Natural Language Inferencecited by 938
  2. 2018Adafactor: Adaptive Learning Rates with Sublinear Memory Costcited by 905
  3. 2020How Much Knowledge Can You Pack Into the Parameters of a Language Model?cited by 719
  4. 2020It's Not Just Size That Matters: Small Language Models Are Also Few-Shot Learnerscited by 669
  5. 2021ByT5: Towards a token-free future with pre-trained byte-to-byte modelscited by 509
  6. 2017Zero-Shot Relation Extraction via Reading Comprehensioncited by 426
  7. 2021True Few-Shot Learning with Language Modelscited by 344
  8. 2016NewsQA: A Machine Comprehension Datasetcited by 331
  9. 2016Bidirectional Attention Flow for Machine Comprehensioncited by 278
  10. 2017SearchQA: A New Q&A Dataset Augmented with Context from a Search Enginecited by 225
  11. 2019A Unified MRC Framework for Named Entity Recognitioncited by 199
  12. 2021How Many Data Points is a Prompt Worth?cited by 198
  13. 2019MRQA 2019 Shared Task: Evaluating Generalization in Reading Comprehensioncited by 184
  14. 2019Coreference Resolution as Query-based Span Predictioncited by 91
  15. 2021Few-Shot Question Answering by Pretraining Span Selectioncited by 62
  16. 2020Reducing Quantity Hallucinations in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 22
  17. 2020Neural Machine Translation without Embeddingscited by 10

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 0; 2023: 0; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.

4 papers.