mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Desiderata for the Context Use of Question Answering Systems

arXiv 2401.18001 ↗First posted 31 Jan 2024cs.CLcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Prior work has uncovered a set of common problems in state-of-the-art context-based question answering (QA) systems: a lack of attention to the context when the latter conflicts with a model's parametric knowledge, little robustness to noise, and a lack of consistency with their answers. However, most prior work focus on one or two of those problems in isolation, which makes it difficult to see trends across them. We aim to close this gap, by first outlining a set of -- previously discussed as well as novel -- desiderata for QA models. We then survey relevant analysis and methods papers to provide an overview of the state of the field. The second part of our work presents experiments where we evaluate 15 QA systems on 5 datasets according to all desiderata at once. We find many novel trends, including (1) systems that are less susceptible to noise are not necessarily more consistent with their answers when given irrelevant context; (2) most systems that are more susceptible to noise are more likely to correctly answer according to a context that conflicts with their parametric knowledge; and (3) the combination of conflicting knowledge and noise can reduce system performance by up to 96%. As such, our desiderata help increase our understanding of how these models work and reveal potential avenues for improvements.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 64 of its 92 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 Jan 2024.

Builds on

64 of 92 references.

References · 64

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  3. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  4. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
  5. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  6. 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,874
  7. 2022PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathwayscited by 5,304
  8. 2019DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lightercited by 4,243
  9. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
  10. 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,747
  11. 2020Longformer: The Long-Document Transformercited by 3,362
  12. 2019ALBERT: A Lite BERT for Self-supervised Learning of Language Representationscited by 2,772
38 more
  1. 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,609
  2. 2018Can a Suit of Armor Conduct Electricity? A New Dataset for Open Book Question Answeringcited by 2,114
  3. 2019Language Models as Knowledge Bases?cited by 1,922
  4. 2020Big Bird: Transformers for Longer Sequencescited by 1,673
  5. 2016MS MARCO: A Human Generated MAchine Reading COmprehension Datasetcited by 1,591
  6. 2018Know What You Don't Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuADcited by 1,538
  7. 2020Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Are Key-Value Memoriescited by 1,307
  8. 2019How Can We Know What Language Models Know?cited by 953
  9. 2017RACE: Large-scale ReAding Comprehension Dataset From Examinationscited by 851
  10. 2023Large Language Models Can Be Easily Distracted by Irrelevant Contextcited by 820
  11. 2017Crowdsourcing Multiple Choice Science Questionscited by 742
  12. 2020How Much Knowledge Can You Pack Into the Parameters of a Language Model?cited by 713
  13. 2018CoQA: A Conversational Question Answering Challengecited by 674
  14. 2017Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systemscited by 568
  15. 2021Editing Factual Knowledge in Language Modelscited by 548
  16. 2021Fast Model Editing at Scalecited by 491
  17. 2020BERT-ATTACK: Adversarial Attack Against BERT Using BERTcited by 488
  18. 2018QuAC : Question Answering in Contextcited by 379
  19. 2021Entity-Based Knowledge Conflicts in Question Answeringcited by 349
  20. 2023MQuAKE: Assessing Knowledge Editing in Language Models via Multi-Hop Questionscited by 292
  21. 2021Factual Probing Is [MASK]: Learning vs. Learning to Recallcited by 291
  22. 2021Time-Aware Language Models as Temporal Knowledge Basescited by 290
  23. 2019Cosmos QA: Machine Reading Comprehension with Contextual Commonsense Reasoningcited by 281
  24. 2022Prompting GPT-3 To Be Reliablecited by 258
  25. 2019Negated and Misprimed Probes for Pretrained Language Models: Birds Can Talk, But Cannot Flycited by 240
  26. 2020Modifying Memories in Transformer Modelscited by 222
  27. 2022Large Language Models with Controllable Working Memorycited by 169
  28. 2022Rich Knowledge Sources Bring Complex Knowledge Conflicts: Recalibrating Models to Reflect Conflicting Evidencecited by 142
  29. 2020Beat the AI: Investigating Adversarial Human Annotation for Reading Comprehensioncited by 131
  30. 2022DisentQA: Disentangling Parametric and Contextual Knowledge with Counterfactual Question Answeringcited by 93
  31. 2018How Much Reading Does Reading Comprehension Require? A Critical Investigation of Popular Benchmarkscited by 86
  32. 2023Crawling the Internal Knowledge-Base of Language Modelscited by 85
  33. 2021Can Language Models be Biomedical Knowledge Bases?cited by 83
  34. 2018Did the Model Understand the Question?cited by 60
  35. 2019On Evaluation of Adversarial Perturbations for Sequence-to-Sequence Modelscited by 56
  36. 2021BeliefBank: Adding Memory to a Pre-Trained Language Model for a Systematic Notion of Beliefcited by 56
  37. 2022Entity Cloze By Date: What LMs Know About Unseen Entitiescited by 55
  38. 2021PROST: Physical Reasoning of Objects through Space and Timecited by 48

50 most cited of 64 All 64 (JSON)

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 5; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

7 papers.