Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

AmbigQA: Answering Ambiguous Open-domain Questions

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

arxiv 2004.10645 v2 pith:KT2QZG7C submitted 2020-04-22 cs.CL cs.AI

AmbigQA: Answering Ambiguous Open-domain Questions

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords ambigqaopen-domainquestionsambiguityansweringnq-openquestiontask
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Ambiguity is inherent to open-domain question answering; especially when exploring new topics, it can be difficult to ask questions that have a single, unambiguous answer. In this paper, we introduce AmbigQA, a new open-domain question answering task which involves finding every plausible answer, and then rewriting the question for each one to resolve the ambiguity. To study this task, we construct AmbigNQ, a dataset covering 14,042 questions from NQ-open, an existing open-domain QA benchmark. We find that over half of the questions in NQ-open are ambiguous, with diverse sources of ambiguity such as event and entity references. We also present strong baseline models for AmbigQA which we show benefit from weakly supervised learning that incorporates NQ-open, strongly suggesting our new task and data will support significant future research effort. Our data and baselines are available at https://nlp.cs.washington.edu/ambigqa.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. The Prompt Report: A Systematic Survey of Prompt Engineering Techniques

    cs.CL 2024-06 accept novelty 7.0

    This systematic survey organizes prompt engineering into a taxonomy of 58 LLM techniques and 40 others, supplies a shared vocabulary, and offers guidelines for state-of-the-art models.

  2. Complementing Self-Consistency with Cross-Model Disagreement for Uncertainty Quantification

    cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Cross-model semantic disagreement adds an epistemic uncertainty term that improves total uncertainty estimation over self-consistency alone, helping flag confident errors in LLMs.

  3. Atlas: Few-shot Learning with Retrieval Augmented Language Models

    cs.CL 2022-08 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Atlas reaches over 42% accuracy on Natural Questions with only 64 examples, outperforming a 540B-parameter model by 3% with 50x fewer parameters.

  4. Unsupervised Dense Information Retrieval with Contrastive Learning

    cs.IR 2021-12 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Contrastive learning trains unsupervised dense retrievers that beat BM25 on most BEIR datasets and support cross-lingual retrieval across scripts.