mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

NOAHQA: Numerical Reasoning with Interpretable Graph Question Answering Dataset

arXiv 2109.10604 ↗First posted 22 Sep 2021cs.CLcited by 14

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

While diverse question answering (QA) datasets have been proposed and contributed significantly to the development of deep learning models for QA tasks, the existing datasets fall short in two aspects. First, we lack QA datasets covering complex questions that involve answers as well as the reasoning processes to get the answers. As a result, the state-of-the-art QA research on numerical reasoning still focuses on simple calculations and does not provide the mathematical expressions or evidences justifying the answers. Second, the QA community has contributed much effort to improving the interpretability of QA models. However, these models fail to explicitly show the reasoning process, such as the evidence order for reasoning and the interactions between different pieces of evidence. To address the above shortcomings, we introduce NOAHQA, a conversational and bilingual QA dataset with questions requiring numerical reasoning with compound mathematical expressions. With NOAHQA, we develop an interpretable reasoning graph as well as the appropriate evaluation metric to measure the answer quality. We evaluate the state-of-the-art QA models trained using existing QA datasets on NOAHQA and show that the best among them can only achieve 55.5 exact match scores, while the human performance is 89.7. We also present a new QA model for generating a reasoning graph where the reasoning graph metric still has a large gap compared with that of humans, e.g., 28 scores.

Key facts. Cited by 14 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 38 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Sep 2021.

Builds on

38 of 48 references.

References · 38

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  3. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  4. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
  5. 2014Learning Phrase Representations using RNN Encoder-Decoder for Statistical Machine Translationcited by 4,016
  6. 2019Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scalecited by 3,907
  7. 2018HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answeringcited by 3,686
  8. 2017Get To The Point: Summarization with Pointer-Generator Networkscited by 1,281
  9. 2020Constructing A Multi-hop QA Dataset for Comprehensive Evaluation of Reasoning Stepscited by 1,259
  10. 2019DROP: A Reading Comprehension Benchmark Requiring Discrete Reasoning Over Paragraphscited by 883
  11. 2021Are NLP Models really able to Solve Simple Math Word Problems?cited by 861
  12. 2017RACE: Large-scale ReAding Comprehension Dataset From Examinationscited by 851
26 more
  1. 2018CoQA: A Conversational Question Answering Challengecited by 674
  2. 2019MathQA: Towards Interpretable Math Word Problem Solving with Operation-Based Formalismscited by 653
  3. 2017Program Induction by Rationale Generation : Learning to Solve and Explain Algebraic Word Problemscited by 642
  4. 2018The Web as a Knowledge-base for Answering Complex Questionscited by 409
  5. 2018QuAC : Question Answering in Contextcited by 379
  6. 2021A Diverse Corpus for Evaluating and Developing English Math Word Problem Solverscited by 314
  7. 2019Don't Take the Easy Way Out: Ensemble Based Methods for Avoiding Known Dataset Biasescited by 279
  8. 2020HybridQA: A Dataset of Multi-Hop Question Answering over Tabular and Textual Datacited by 263
  9. 2017OpenNMT: Open-source Toolkit for Neural Machine Translationcited by 251
  10. 2018QANet: Combining Local Convolution with Global Self-Attention for Reading Comprehensioncited by 164
  11. 2019DREAM: A Challenge Dataset and Models for Dialogue-Based Reading Comprehensioncited by 156
  12. 2021Explaining Answers with Entailment Treescited by 148
  13. 2020Break It Down: A Question Understanding Benchmarkcited by 131
  14. 2019Compositional Questions Do Not Necessitate Multi-hop Reasoningcited by 87
  15. 2018How Much Reading Does Reading Comprehension Require? A Critical Investigation of Popular Benchmarkscited by 86
  16. 2019NumNet: Machine Reading Comprehension with Numerical Reasoningcited by 59
  17. 2018Translating a Math Word Problem to an Expression Treecited by 57
  18. 2020PRover: Proof Generation for Interpretable Reasoning over Rulescited by 53
  19. 2016Machine Comprehension Using Match-LSTM and Answer Pointercited by 47
  20. 2020Measuring Systematic Generalization in Neural Proof Generation with Transformerscited by 43
  21. 2019Look before you Hop: Conversational Question Answering over Knowledge Graphs Using Judicious Context Expansioncited by 42
  22. 2017Mapping to Declarative Knowledge for Word Problem Solvingcited by 36
  23. 2019R4C: A Benchmark for Evaluating RC Systems to Get the Right Answer for the Right Reasoncited by 36
  24. 2020Semantically-Aligned Universal Tree-Structured Solver for Math Word Problemscited by 35
  25. 2018FlowQA: Grasping Flow in History for Conversational Machine Comprehensioncited by 33
  26. 2018A Meaning-based Statistical English Math Word Problem Solvercited by 10

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 5; 2023: 4; 2024: 1; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.

14 papers.

Sort:

By area: