REVIEW 1 cited by
Question Answering is a Format; When is it Useful?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Question Answering is a Format; When is it Useful?
read the original abstract
Recent years have seen a dramatic expansion of tasks and datasets posed as question answering, from reading comprehension, semantic role labeling, and even machine translation, to image and video understanding. With this expansion, there are many differing views on the utility and definition of "question answering" itself. Some argue that its scope should be narrow, or broad, or that it is overused in datasets today. In this opinion piece, we argue that question answering should be considered a format which is sometimes useful for studying particular phenomena, not a phenomenon or task in itself. We discuss when a task is correctly described as question answering, and when a task is usefully posed as question answering, instead of using some other format.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
ProMQA-Assembly: Multimodal Procedural QA Dataset on Assembly
ProMQA-Assembly is a new multimodal procedural QA dataset with 646 pairs on assembly activities, built via LLM-generated candidates verified by humans plus 81 task graphs, and used to benchmark multimodal models.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.