File size: 130,152 Bytes
6fa4bc9 |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 1561 1562 1563 1564 1565 1566 1567 1568 1569 1570 1571 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581 1582 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1593 1594 1595 1596 1597 1598 1599 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613 1614 1615 1616 1617 1618 1619 1620 1621 1622 1623 1624 1625 1626 1627 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1635 1636 1637 1638 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648 1649 1650 1651 1652 1653 1654 1655 1656 1657 1658 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1669 1670 1671 1672 1673 1674 1675 1676 1677 1678 1679 1680 1681 1682 1683 1684 1685 1686 1687 1688 1689 1690 1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1696 1697 1698 1699 1700 1701 1702 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 1713 1714 1715 1716 1717 1718 1719 1720 1721 1722 1723 1724 1725 1726 1727 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732 1733 1734 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1742 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1751 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1758 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1768 1769 1770 1771 1772 1773 1774 1775 1776 1777 1778 1779 1780 1781 1782 1783 1784 1785 1786 1787 1788 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 2077 2078 2079 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2087 2088 2089 2090 2091 2092 2093 2094 2095 2096 2097 2098 2099 2100 2101 2102 2103 2104 2105 2106 2107 2108 2109 2110 2111 2112 2113 2114 2115 2116 2117 2118 2119 2120 2121 2122 2123 2124 2125 2126 2127 2128 2129 2130 2131 2132 2133 2134 2135 2136 2137 2138 2139 2140 2141 2142 2143 2144 2145 2146 2147 2148 2149 2150 2151 2152 2153 2154 2155 2156 2157 2158 2159 2160 2161 2162 2163 2164 2165 2166 2167 2168 2169 2170 2171 2172 2173 2174 2175 2176 2177 2178 2179 2180 2181 2182 2183 2184 2185 2186 2187 2188 2189 2190 2191 2192 2193 2194 2195 2196 2197 2198 2199 2200 2201 2202 2203 2204 2205 2206 2207 2208 2209 2210 2211 2212 2213 2214 2215 2216 2217 2218 2219 2220 2221 2222 2223 2224 2225 2226 2227 2228 2229 2230 2231 2232 2233 2234 2235 2236 2237 2238 2239 2240 2241 2242 2243 2244 2245 2246 2247 2248 2249 2250 2251 2252 2253 2254 2255 2256 2257 2258 2259 2260 2261 2262 2263 2264 2265 2266 2267 2268 2269 2270 2271 2272 2273 2274 2275 2276 2277 2278 2279 2280 2281 2282 2283 2284 2285 2286 2287 2288 2289 2290 2291 2292 2293 2294 2295 2296 2297 2298 2299 2300 2301 2302 2303 2304 2305 2306 2307 2308 2309 2310 2311 2312 2313 2314 2315 2316 2317 2318 2319 2320 2321 2322 2323 2324 2325 2326 2327 2328 2329 2330 2331 2332 2333 2334 2335 2336 2337 2338 2339 2340 2341 2342 2343 2344 2345 2346 2347 2348 2349 2350 2351 2352 2353 2354 2355 2356 2357 2358 2359 2360 2361 2362 2363 2364 2365 2366 2367 2368 2369 2370 2371 2372 2373 2374 2375 2376 2377 2378 2379 2380 2381 2382 2383 2384 2385 2386 2387 2388 2389 2390 2391 2392 2393 2394 2395 2396 2397 2398 2399 2400 2401 2402 2403 2404 2405 2406 2407 2408 2409 2410 2411 2412 2413 2414 2415 2416 2417 2418 2419 2420 2421 2422 2423 2424 2425 2426 2427 2428 2429 2430 2431 2432 2433 2434 2435 2436 2437 2438 2439 2440 2441 2442 2443 2444 2445 2446 2447 2448 2449 2450 2451 2452 2453 2454 2455 2456 2457 2458 2459 2460 2461 2462 2463 2464 2465 2466 2467 2468 2469 2470 2471 2472 2473 2474 2475 2476 2477 2478 2479 2480 2481 2482 2483 2484 2485 2486 2487 |
{
"paper_id": "2021",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T07:24:21.402825Z"
},
"title": "Is that really a question? Going beyond factoid questions in NLP",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Aikaterini-Lida",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kalouli",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "University of Konstanz",
"location": {}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Rebecca",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kehlbeck",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "University of Konstanz",
"location": {}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Rita",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sevastjanova",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "University of Konstanz",
"location": {}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Oliver",
"middle": [],
"last": "Deussen",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "University of Konstanz",
"location": {}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Daniel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Keim",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "University of Konstanz",
"location": {}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Miriam",
"middle": [],
"last": "Butt",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "University of Konstanz",
"location": {}
},
"email": ""
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "Research in NLP has mainly focused on factoid questions, with the goal of finding quick and reliable ways of matching a query to an answer. However, human discourse involves more than that: it contains non-canonical questions deployed to achieve specific communicative goals. In this paper, we investigate this under-studied aspect of NLP by introducing a targeted task, creating an appropriate corpus for the task and providing baseline models of diverse nature. With this, we are also able to generate useful insights on the task and open the way for future research in this direction.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "2021",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "Research in NLP has mainly focused on factoid questions, with the goal of finding quick and reliable ways of matching a query to an answer. However, human discourse involves more than that: it contains non-canonical questions deployed to achieve specific communicative goals. In this paper, we investigate this under-studied aspect of NLP by introducing a targeted task, creating an appropriate corpus for the task and providing baseline models of diverse nature. With this, we are also able to generate useful insights on the task and open the way for future research in this direction.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "Recently, the field of human-machine interaction has seen ground-breaking progress, with the tasks of Question-Answering (QA) and Dialog achieving even human-like performance. The probably most popular example is Watson (Ferrucci et al., 2013) , IBM's QA system which was able to compete on the US TV program Jeopardy! and beat the best players of the show. Since then and particularly with the rise of Neural Networks (NN), various high-performance QA and Dialog systems have emerged. For example, on the QQP task of the GLUE benchmark (Wang et al., 2018) , the currently best performing system achieves an accuracy of 90.8%. Despite this success, current QA and Dialog systems cannot be claimed to be on a par with human communication. In this paper we address one core aspect of human discourse that is underresearched within NLP: non-canonical questions.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 220,
"end": 243,
"text": "(Ferrucci et al., 2013)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF16"
},
{
"start": 537,
"end": 556,
"text": "(Wang et al., 2018)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF34"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Research in NLP has mainly focused on factoid questions, e.g., When was Mozart born?, with the goal of finding quick and reliable ways of matching a query to terms found in a given text collection. There has been less focus on understanding the structure of questions per se and the communicative goal they aim to achieve. State-of-the-art parsers are mainly trained on Wikipedia entries or newspaper texts, e.g., the Wall Street Journal, genres which do not contain many questions. Thus, the tools trained on them are not effective in dealing with questions, let alone distinguishing between different types. Even within more computational settings that include deep linguistic knowledge, e.g., PARC's Bridge QA system (Bobrow et al., 2007) which uses a sophisticated LFG parser and semantic analysis, the actual nature and structure of different types of questions is not studied in detail.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 703,
"end": 741,
"text": "Bridge QA system (Bobrow et al., 2007)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "However, if we are aiming at human-like NLP systems, it is essential to be able to efficiently deal with the fine nuances of non-factoid questions (Dayal, 2016) . Questions might be posed",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 147,
"end": 160,
"text": "(Dayal, 2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 as a (sarcastic, playful) comment, e.g., Have you ever cooked an egg? (rhetorical)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 to repeat what was said or to express incredulity/surprise, e.g., He went where?",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 to make a decision, e.g., What shall we have for dinner? (deliberative)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 to deliberate rather than ask or to rather ask oneself than others, e.g., Do I even want to go out? (self-addressed)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 to request or order something, e.g., Can you pass me the salt? (ability/inclination)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 to suggest that a certain answer should be given in reply, e.g., Don't you think that calling names is wrong? (suggestive)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 to assert something, e.g., You are coming, aren't you? (tag)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 to quote the words of somebody else, e.g., And he said, \"Why do you bother?\" (quoted)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 to structure the discourse, e.g., What has this taught us? It ... (discourse-structuring)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 etc.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "The importance of these communicative goals in everyday discourse can be seen in systems like personal assistants, chatbots and social media. For example, personal assistants like Siri, Alexa and Google should be able to distinguish an ability question of the kind Can you play XYZ? from a rhetorical question such as Can you be even more stupid? Similarly, chatbots offering psychotherapeutic help (Ly et al., 2017; H\u00e5vik et al., 2019) should be able to differentiate between a factoid question such as Is this a symptom for my condition? and a self-addressed question, e.g., Why can't I do anything right? In social media platforms like Twitter, apart from the canonical questions of the type Do you know how to tell if a brachiopod is alive?, we also find non-canonical ones like why am I lucky? Paul et al. 2011show that 42% of all questions on English Twitter are rhetorical.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 399,
"end": 416,
"text": "(Ly et al., 2017;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF24"
},
{
"start": 417,
"end": 436,
"text": "H\u00e5vik et al., 2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF18"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "To enable NLP systems to capture non-factoid uses of questions, we propose the task of Question-Type Identification (QTI). The task can be defined as follows: given a question, determine whether it is an information-seeking question (ISQ) or a non information-seeking question (NISQ). The former type of question, also known as a canonical or factoid question, is posed to elicit information, e.g., What will the weather be like tomorrow? In contrast, questions that achieve other communicative goals are considered non-canonical, noninformation-seeking. NISQs do not constitute a homogeneous class, but are heterogeneous, comprising sub-types that are sometimes difficult to keep apart (Dayal, 2016) . But even at the coarsegrained level of distinguishing ISQs from NISQs, the task is difficult: surface forms and structural cues are not particularly helpful; instead, Bartels (1999) and Dayal (2016) find that prosody and context are key factors in question classification.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 687,
"end": 700,
"text": "(Dayal, 2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 870,
"end": 884,
"text": "Bartels (1999)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
},
{
"start": 889,
"end": 901,
"text": "Dayal (2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Our ultimate objective in this paper is to provide an empirical evaluation of learning-centered approaches to QTI, setting baselines for the task and proposing it as a tool for the evaluation of QA and Dialog systems. However, to the best of our knowledge, there are currently no openly available QTI corpora that can permit such an assessment. The little previous research on the task has not contributed suitable corpora, leading to comparability issues. To address this, this paper introduces RQueT (rocket), the Resource of Question Types, a collection of questions in-the-wild labeled for their ISQ-NISQ type. As the first of its kind, the resource of 2000 annotated questions allows for initial machine-/deep-learning experimentation and opens the way for more research in this direction.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In this paper, we use this corpus to evaluate a variety of models in a wide range of settings, including simple linear classifiers, language models and other neural network architectures. We find that simple linear classifiers can compete with state-ofthe-art transformer models like BERT (Devlin et al., 2019) , while a neural network model, combining features from BERT and the simple classifiers, can outperform the rest of the settings.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 289,
"end": 310,
"text": "(Devlin et al., 2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Our contributions in this paper are three-fold. First, we provide the first openly-available QTI corpus, aiming at introducing the task and comprising an initial benchmark. Second, we establish suitable baselines for QTI, comparing systems of very different nature. Finally, we generate linguistic insights on the task and set the scene for future research in this area.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Within modern theoretical linguistics, a large body of research exists on questions. Some first analyses focused on the most well-known types, i.e., deliberative, rhetorical and tag questions (Wheatley, 1955; Sadock, 1971; Cattell, 1973; Bolinger, 1978 , to name only a few). Recently, researchers have studied the effect of prosody on the type of question as well as the interaction of prosody and semantics on the different types (Bartels, 1999; Dayal, 2016; Biezma and Rawlins, 2017; Beltrama et al., 2019 ; Eckardt, 2020, to name a few). It should also be noted that research in developing detailed pragmatic annotation schemes for human dialogs, thus also addressing questions, has a long tradition, e.g., Jurafsky et al. (1997) ; Novielli and Strapparava (2009) ; Bunt et al. (2016) ; Asher et al. (2016) . However, most of this work is too broad and at the same time too fine-grained for our purposes: on the one hand, it does not focus on questions and thus these are not studied in the desired depth and on the other, the annotation performed is sometimes too fine-grained for computational approaches. Thus, we do not report further on this literature.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 192,
"end": 208,
"text": "(Wheatley, 1955;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 209,
"end": 222,
"text": "Sadock, 1971;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF29"
},
{
"start": 223,
"end": 237,
"text": "Cattell, 1973;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
},
{
"start": 238,
"end": 252,
"text": "Bolinger, 1978",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
},
{
"start": 432,
"end": 447,
"text": "(Bartels, 1999;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
},
{
"start": 448,
"end": 460,
"text": "Dayal, 2016;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 461,
"end": 486,
"text": "Biezma and Rawlins, 2017;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
},
{
"start": 487,
"end": 508,
"text": "Beltrama et al., 2019",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
},
{
"start": 711,
"end": 733,
"text": "Jurafsky et al. (1997)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF20"
},
{
"start": 736,
"end": 767,
"text": "Novielli and Strapparava (2009)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF26"
},
{
"start": 770,
"end": 788,
"text": "Bunt et al. (2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
},
{
"start": 791,
"end": 810,
"text": "Asher et al. (2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Relevant Work",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "In computational linguistics, questions have mainly been studied within QA/Dialog systems, (e.g., Alloatti et al. (2019) ; Su et al. (2019) ), and within Question Generation, (e.g., Sasazawa et al. (2019) ; Chan and Fan (2019) ). Only a limited amount of research has focused on (versions of) the QTI task. One strand of research has used social media data -mostly Twitter -training simple classifier models (Harper et al., 2009; Li et al., 2011; Zhao and Mei, 2013; Ranganath et al., 2016) . Although this body of work reports on interesting methods and findings, the research does not follow a consistent task definition, analysing slightly different things that range from \"distinguishing informational and conversational questions\", \"analysis of information needs on Twitter\" to the identification of rhetorical questions. Additionally, they do not evaluate on a common dataset, making comparisons difficult. Furthermore, they all deal with social media data, which, despite its own challenges (e.g., shortness, ungrammaticality, typos), is enriched with further markers like usernames, hashtags and urls, which can be successfully used for the classification. A different approach to the task is pursued by Paul et al. 2011, who crowdsources human annotations for a large amount of Twitter questions, without applying any automatic recognition. More recently, the efforts by Zymla (2014), Bhattasali et al. (2015) and Kalouli et al. (2018) are more reproducible. The former develops a rulebased approach to identify rhetorical questions in German Twitter data, while Bhattasali et al. (2015) implements a machine-learning system to identify rhetorical questions in the Switchboard Dialogue Act Corpus. In Kalouli et al. (2018) a rule-based multilingual approach is applied on a parallel corpus based on the Bible.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 98,
"end": 120,
"text": "Alloatti et al. (2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
},
{
"start": 123,
"end": 139,
"text": "Su et al. (2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF32"
},
{
"start": 182,
"end": 204,
"text": "Sasazawa et al. (2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF30"
},
{
"start": 207,
"end": 226,
"text": "Chan and Fan (2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
},
{
"start": 408,
"end": 429,
"text": "(Harper et al., 2009;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF17"
},
{
"start": 430,
"end": 446,
"text": "Li et al., 2011;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF22"
},
{
"start": 447,
"end": 466,
"text": "Zhao and Mei, 2013;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF37"
},
{
"start": 467,
"end": 490,
"text": "Ranganath et al., 2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF28"
},
{
"start": 1394,
"end": 1418,
"text": "Bhattasali et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
},
{
"start": 1423,
"end": 1444,
"text": "Kalouli et al. (2018)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
},
{
"start": 1572,
"end": 1596,
"text": "Bhattasali et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
},
{
"start": 1710,
"end": 1731,
"text": "Kalouli et al. (2018)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Relevant Work",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "The above overview of relevant work indicates that creating suitable training datasets is challenging, mainly due to the sparsity of available data. Social media data can be found in large numbers and contains questions of both types (Wang and Chua, 2010) , but often the context in which the questions are found is missing or very limited, making their classification difficult even for humans. On the other hand, corpora with well-edited text such as newspapers, books and speeches are generally less suitable, as questions, in particular NISQs, tend to appear more often in spontaneous, unedited communication. Thus, to create a suitable benchmark, we need to devise a corpus fulfilling three desiderata: a) containing naturally-occurring data, b) featuring enough questions of both types, and c) providing enough context for disambiguation.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 234,
"end": 255,
"text": "(Wang and Chua, 2010)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF35"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "RQueT: a New Corpus for QTI",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "To this end, we find that the CNN transcripts 1 fulfill all three desiderata. We randomly sampled 2000 questions of the years 2006-2015, from settings featuring a live discussion/interview between the host of a show and guests. Questions are detected based on the presence of a question mark; this method misses the so-called \"declarative\" questions (Beun, 1989) , which neither end with a question mark nor have the syntactic structure of a question, but this compromise is necessary for this first attempt on a larger-scale corpus. Given the importance of the context for the distinction of the question types (Dayal, 2016) , along with the question, we also extracted two sentences before and two sentences after the question as context. For each of these sentences as well as for the question itself, we additionally collected speaker information. Table 1 shows an excerpt of our corpus. Unfortunately, due to copyright reasons, we can only provide a shortened version of this corpus containing only 1768 questions; this can be gained via the CNN transcripts corpus made available by Sood (2017). 2 The results reported here concern this subcorpus, but we also provide the results of the entire corpus of 2000 questions in Appendix A. Our corpus is split in a 80/20 fashion, with a training set of 1588 and a test set of 180 questions (or 1800/200 for the entire corpus, respectively).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 350,
"end": 362,
"text": "(Beun, 1989)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
},
{
"start": 612,
"end": 625,
"text": "(Dayal, 2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 1102,
"end": 1103,
"text": "2",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 852,
"end": 860,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Data Collection",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "The RQueT corpus is annotated with a binary scheme of ISQ/NISQ and does not contain a finergrained annotation of the specific sub-type of NISQ. We find it necessary to first establish the task in its binary formulation. Each question of our corpus was annotated by three graduate students of computational linguistics. The annotators were only given the definition of each type of question and an example, as presented in Section 1, and no further instructions. The lack of more detailed instructions was deliberate: for one, we wanted to see how easy and intuitive the task is for humans given that they perform it in daily communication. For another, to the best of our knowledge, there are no previous annotation guidelines or best-practices available.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Data Annotation",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "The final label of each question was determined by majority vote, with an inter-annotator agreement of 89.3% and Fleiss Kappa at 0.58. This moderate Sentence Text Speaker QT Ctx 2 Before This is humor.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Data Annotation",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "S. BAXTER",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Data Annotation",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "Ctx 1 Before I think women, female candidates, have to be able to take those shots.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "NISQ",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "John Edwards got joked at for his $400 hair cut, was it?",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "S. BAXTER Question",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "And you know, he was called a Brett Girl.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "S. BAXTER Ctx 1 After",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "This, is you know, the cut and thrust of politics. S. BAXTER Table 1 : Sample of the corpus format. Each row contains a sentence and its context before and after. The question and its context also hold the speaker information. Each question is separately annotated for its type.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 61,
"end": 68,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "S. BAXTER Ctx 2 After",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "agreement reflects the difficulty of the task even for humans and hints at the improvement potential of the corpus through further context, e.g., in the form of intonation and prosody (see e.g., Bartels 1999) . The resulting corpus is an (almost) balanced set of 944 (1076 for the entire corpus) ISQ and 824 (924 for the entire corpus) NISQ. The same balance is also preserved in the training and test splits. Table 2 gives an overview of RQueT.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 195,
"end": 208,
"text": "Bartels 1999)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 410,
"end": 418,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": "TABREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "S. BAXTER Ctx 2 After",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We used the RQueT corpus to evaluate a variety of models, 3 establishing appropriate baselines and generating insights about the nature and peculiarities of the task.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "RQueT as a Benchmarking Platform",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "Following previous literature (Harper et al., 2009; Li et al., 2011; Zymla, 2014; Bhattasali et al., 2015; Ranganath et al., 2016) and our own intuitions, we extracted 6 kinds of features, 2 lexicalized and 4 unlexicalized, a total of 16 distinct features:",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 30,
"end": 51,
"text": "(Harper et al., 2009;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF17"
},
{
"start": 52,
"end": 68,
"text": "Li et al., 2011;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF22"
},
{
"start": 69,
"end": 81,
"text": "Zymla, 2014;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF38"
},
{
"start": 82,
"end": 106,
"text": "Bhattasali et al., 2015;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
},
{
"start": 107,
"end": 130,
"text": "Ranganath et al., 2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF28"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexicalized and Unlexicalized Features",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "1. lexicalized: bigrams and trigrams of the surface forms of the question itself (Q), of the context-before (ctxB1 and ctxB2, for the first and second sentence before the question, respectively) and of the context-after (ctxA1 and ctxA2, for the first and second sentence after the question, respectively) 2. lexicalized: bigrams and trigrams of the POS tags of the surface forms of the question itself (Q), of the context-before (ctxB1, ctxB2) and of the context-after (ctxA1 and ctxA2)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexicalized and Unlexicalized Features",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "3. unlexicalized: the length difference between the question and its first context-before (len-DiffQB) and the question and its first contextafter (lenDiffQA), as real-valued features 4. unlexicalized: the overlap between the words in the question and its first contextbefore/after, both as an absolute count 3 https://github.com/kkalouli/RQueT ISQ NISQ All Train 847 969) 741 (831) 1588 (1800Test 97 10783 93180 (200) Total 944 1076) 824 (924) 1768 (2000 (wOverBAbs and wOverAAbs for context before/after, respectively) and as a percentage (wOverBPerc and wOverAPerc for context before/after, respectively) 5. unlexicalized: a binary feature capturing whether the speaker of the question is the same as the speaker of the context-before/after (speakerB and speakerA, respectively) 6. unlexicalized: the cosine similarity of the In-ferSent (Conneau et al., 2017) embedding of the question to the embedding of the first context-before/after 4 (similQB and similQA, respectively).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 840,
"end": 862,
"text": "(Conneau et al., 2017)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexicalized and Unlexicalized Features",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "We used these feature combinations to train three linear classifiers for each setting: a Naive Bayes classifier (NB), a Support Vector Machine (SVM) and a Decision Tree (DT). These traditional classifiers were trained with the LightSide workbecnh. 5 The Stanford CoreNLP toolkit (Toutanova et al., 2003) was used for POS tagging.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 248,
"end": 249,
"text": "5",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 279,
"end": 303,
"text": "(Toutanova et al., 2003)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF33"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexicalized and Unlexicalized Features",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "Given the success of contextualized language models and their efficient modeling of semantic information, e.g., Jawahar et al. (2019) ; Lin et al. (2019), we experiment with BERT (Devlin et al., 2019) for this task. Since the semantic relations between the question and its context are considered the most significant predictors of QT, contextualized models should be able to establish a clear baseline. The QTI task can be largely seen as a sequence classification task, much as Natural Language Inference and QA. Thus, we format the corpus into appropriate BERT sequences, i.e., question-only sequence or question -context-before or question -contextafter sequence, and fine-tune the pretrained BERT (base) model on that input. We explicitly fine-tune the parameters recommended by the authors. The best models train for 2 epochs, have a batch size of 32 and a learning rate of 2e-5. By fine-tuning the embeddings, we simultaneously solve the QTI task, which is the performance we report on in this setting. The fine-tuning is conducted through HuggingFace. 6",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 112,
"end": 133,
"text": "Jawahar et al. (2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF19"
},
{
"start": 179,
"end": 200,
"text": "(Devlin et al., 2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Fine-tuning Pretrained BERT",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "The fine-tuned BERT embeddings of Section 4.2 can be extracted as fixed features to initialize further classifier models (cf. Devlin et al. 2019) . We input them to the same linear classifiers used in section 4.1, i.e., NB, SVM and DT, but also use them for neural net (NN) classifiers because such architectures are particularly efficient in capturing the high-dimensionality of these inputs. To utilize the most representative fine-tuned BERT embeddings, we experiment with the average token embeddings of layer 11 and the [CLS] embedding of layer 11. We chose layer 11 as the higher layers of BERT have been shown to mostly capture semantic aspects, while the last layer has been found to be very close to the actual classification task and thus less suitable (Jawahar et al., 2019; Lin et al., 2019) . We found that the [CLS] embedding performs better and thus, we only report on this setting.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 126,
"end": 145,
"text": "Devlin et al. 2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
},
{
"start": 763,
"end": 785,
"text": "(Jawahar et al., 2019;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF19"
},
{
"start": 786,
"end": 803,
"text": "Lin et al., 2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "BERT Embeddings as Fixed Features",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "Moreover, as shown in Section 5, some of the unlexicalized features of Section 4.1 lead to competitive performance with the pretrained BERT models. Thus, we decided to investigate whether the most predictive unlexicalized feature can be efficiently combined with the BERT fine-tuned embeddings and lead to an even higher performance. To this end, each linear classifier and NN model was also trained on an extended vector, comprising the CLS-layer11 fine-tuned BERT embedding of the respective model, i.e., only of the question (Q-Embedding), of the question and its (first) contextbefore (Q-ctxB-Embedding) and of the question and its (first) context-after (Q-ctxA-Embedding) as a fixed vector, and an additional dimension for the 6 https://huggingface.co/ binary encoded unlexicalized feature.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "BERT Embeddings as Fixed Features",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "We experimented with three NN architectures and NN-specific parameters were determined via a grid search separately for each model. Each NN was optimized through a held-out validation set (20% of the training set). First, we trained a Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) with a ReLU activation and the Adam optimizer. Second, we trained a feedforward (FF) NN with 5 dense hidden layers and the RMSprop optimizer. Last, we trained an LSTM with 2 hidden layers and the RMSprop optimizer. Both the FF and the LSTM use a sigmoid activation for the output layer, suitable for the binary classification. All NNs were trained with sklearn.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "BERT Embeddings as Fixed Features",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "The results of the training settings are presented in Table 3 . Recall that these results concern the corpus of 1768 questions. The results on the entire corpus can be found in Appendix A. For space reasons, we only present the most significant settings and results. For the lexicalized features, all models use both the surface and the POS n-grams as their combination proved best -the separate settings are omitted for brevity, so e.g., Q tokens/POS stands for a) the question's bigrams and trigrams and b) the question's POS bigrams and trigrams. All performance reported in Table 3 represents the accuracy of the models.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 54,
"end": 61,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 578,
"end": 585,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Quantitative Observations",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "The careful benchmarking presented in Table 3 allows for various observations. We start off with the diverse combinations of lexicalized and unlexicalized features. First, we see that training only on the question, i.e., on its n-grams and POS tags, can serve as a suitable baseline with an accuracy of 62.7% for NB. Adding the first context-before improves performance and further adding the second context-before improves it even further at 72.7% for NB. A similar performance leap is observed when the first context-after is added to the question (73.3% for NB), while further adding the second context-after does not change the picture. Since adding the first context-before and -after to the question increases accuracy, we also report on the setting where both first context-before and -after are added to the question. This does indeed boost the performance even more, reaching an accuracy of 75% for NB. Given that the second contextbefore is beneficial for the Q+ctxB1+ctxB2 setting, we add it to the previously best model of 75% Table 3 : Accuracy of the various classifiers and feature combinations (settings). A checkmark means that this feature was present in this setting. PT stands for the pretrained BERT embeddings and FN for the fine-tuned ones. Bolded figures are the best performances across types of classifiers. The stared figure is the best performing ensemble model across settings. wOverAbs and wOverPerc are omitted for brevity. and find out that their combination rather harms the accuracy. Experimenting with both contextsbefore and -after and the question does not lead to any improvements either. The combinations of the lexicalized features show that the best setting is the one where the question is enriched by its first context-before and -after (75%).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 38,
"end": 45,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1039,
"end": 1046,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Quantitative Observations",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "We make a striking observation with respect to the unlexicalized features. Training only on the speaker-after, i.e., on whether the speaker of the question is the same as the speaker of the first context-after, and ignoring entirely the question and context representation is able to correctly predict the QT in 77.7% of the cases. This even outperforms the best setting of the lexicalized features. The speaker-before does not seem to have the same expressive power and training on both speaker fea-tures does not benefit performance either. We also find that the rest of the unlexicalized features do not have any impact on performance because training on each of them alone hardly outperforms the simple Q tokens/POS baseline, while by training on all unlexicalized features together we do not achieve better results than simply training on speaker-after. 7 Based on the finding that the speaker-after is so powerful, we trained hybrid combinations of lexicalized features and the speaker information. First, the speaker-before is added to the Q+ctxB1+ctxB2, which is the best setting of contexts-before, but we do not observe any significant performance change. This is expected given that speaker-before alone does not have a strong performance. Then, the speaker-after is added to the setting Q+ctxA1 and the performance reaches 76.1% (for DT), approaching the best score of speaker-after. The addition of speaker-before to this last setting does not improve performance. On the other hand, adding the speaker-after information to the best lexicalized setting (Q+ctxB1+ctxA1) does not have an effect, probably due to a complex interaction between the context-before and the speaker. This performance does not benefit either from adding the second context-before (which proved beneficial before) or adding the other unlexicalized features. 8 Moving on, we employ the pretrained BERT embeddings to solve the QTI task. Here, we can see that the model containing the question and the context-after (Q-ctxA-Embedding) is the best one with 80.1%, followed by the model containing the question and the context-before (Q-ctxB-Embedding, 78.3). Worst-performing is the model based only on the question (Q-Embedding). This simple fine-tuning task shows that contextualized embeddings like BERT are able to capture the QT more efficiently than lexicalized and unlexicalized features -they even slightly outperform the powerful speaker feature. This means that utilizing these fine-tuned embeddings as fixed input vectors for further classifiers can lead to even better results, and especially, their combination with the predictive speaker information can prove beneficial.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 859,
"end": 860,
"text": "7",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1845,
"end": 1846,
"text": "8",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Quantitative Observations",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "In this last classification setting, we observe that the classifiers trained only on the fine-tuned BERT embeddings deliver similar performance to the finetuning task itself. This finding reproduces what is reported by Devlin et al. (2019) . However, the real value of using this feature-based approach is highlighted through the addition of the speaker information to the contextualized vectors. The speaker information boosts performance both in the setting of fine-tuned Q-Embedding and in the setting finetuned Q-ctxA-Embedding. In fact, the latter is the best performing model of all with an accuracy of 84.4%. Adding the speaker-before information to the fine-tuned Q-ctxB-Embedding does not have an impact on performance due to the low impact of the speaker-before feature itself.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 219,
"end": 239,
"text": "Devlin et al. (2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Quantitative Observations",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "The results presented offer us interesting insights for this novel task. First, they confirm the previous finding of the theoretical and computational literature that context is essential in determining the question type. Both the lexicalized and the embeddings settings improve when context is added. Concerning the lexicalized settings, we conclude that the surface and syntactic cues present within the question and its first context-after are more powerful than the cues present within the question and the first context-before. This is consistent with the intuition that whatever follows a question tends to have a more similar structure to the question itself than whatever precedes it: no matter if the utterer of the question continues talking or if another person addresses the question, the attempt is to stay as close to the question as possible, to either achieve a specific communication goal or to actually answer the question, respectively. However, our experiments also show that combining the first context-before and -after with the question does indeed capture the most structural cues, generating the insight that one sentence before and after the question is sufficient context for the task at hand. Interestingly, we can confirm that the second context-after is not useful to the classification of the QT, probably being too dissimilar to the question itself. Table 4 shows examples of the most predictive structural cues for the best setting of the lexicalized classifiers (Q+ctxB1+ctxA1).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 1382,
"end": 1389,
"text": "Table 4",
"ref_id": "TABREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Qualitative Interpretation",
"sec_num": "5.2"
},
{
"text": "ISQ you feel, what do you, do you agree, make of that, you expect, me ask you, why did you, how did you NISQ why arent't, and should we, COMMA how about, how could, do we want, can we Training on non-linguistic unlexicalized features does not boost performance. However, our work provides strong evidence that the speaker metainformation is of significant importance for the classification. This does not seem to be a peculiarity of this dataset as later experimentation with a further English dataset and with a German corpus shows that the speaker information is consistently a powerful predictor. Additionally, we can confirm from Appendix A that the speaker feature has the same behavior, when trained and tested on the entire corpus. To the best of our knowledge, previous literature has not detected the strength of this feature. From the prediction power of this feature, it Figure 1 : Interactive visualization of the wrongly predicted instances of the models fine-tuned Q-ctxB-Embedding and fine-tuned Q-ctxA-Embedding+speakerA. Based on this visualization, we can observe sentences with similar patterns and how these are learned from the models. Some sentences are ambiguous having both patterns; thus, we need a third model for our ensemble. might seem that information on the question and its context is not necessary at all. However, we show that the addition of the linguistic information of the question and its context through the finetuned embeddings provides a clear boost for the performance. The importance of similar linguistic unlexicalized features has to be investigated in future work. In fact, for the current work, we also experimented with the topic information, i.e., based on topic modeling, we extracted a binary feature capturing whether the topic of the question and the context-after is the same or not. However, this feature did not prove useful in any of the settings and was thus omitted from the analysis. Future work will have to investigate whether a better topic model leads to a more expressive binary feature and whether other such features, such as sentiment extracted from a sentiment classification model, can prove powerful predictors.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 882,
"end": 890,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Qualitative Interpretation",
"sec_num": "5.2"
},
{
"text": "Concerning the distributional and NN methods, this is the first work employing such techniques for the task and confirming the findings of the more traditional machine learning settings. Fine-tuning the pretrained BERT embeddings reproduces what we showed for the standard classifiers: the context and especially the context-after boosts the performance. This finding is also confirmed when treating the fine-tuned BERT embeddings as standard feature vectors and further training on them. Most importantly, this setting allows for the expansion of the feature vector with the speaker information: this then leads to the best performance. Unsurprisingly, the speaker-before is not beneficial for the classification, as it was not itself a strong predictor. Finally, we also observe that the results reported for this smaller corpus are parallel to the results reported for the entire corpus (see Appendix A).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Qualitative Interpretation",
"sec_num": "5.2"
},
{
"text": "By studying Table 3 the question arises whether our best-performing model of fine-tuned Q-ctxA-Embedding+speakerA can be further improved and crucially, whether the context-before can be of value. With our lexicalized models, we show that the best models are those exploiting the information of the context-before, in addition to the question and the context-after. However, all of our BERT-based models have been trained either on the combination of question and context-before or on the combination of question and context-after, but never the combination of all three. The inherent nature of the BERT model, which requires the input sequence to consist of a pair, i.e., at most two distinct sentences separated by the special token [SEP], is not optimized for a triple input. On the other hand, \"tricking\" BERT into considering the context-before and the question as one sentence delivers poor results. Thus, we decided to exploit the power of visualization to see whether an ensemble model combining our so far best performing model of fine-tuned Q-ctxA-Embedding+speakerA with our context-before BERT-based model fine-tuned Q-ctxB-Embedding would be beneficial.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 12,
"end": 19,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Further Extension & Optimization",
"sec_num": "5.3"
},
{
"text": "To this end, we created a small interactive Python visualization to compare the two models, using UMAP (McInnes et al., 2018) as a dimensionality reduction technique and visualizing the datapoints in a 2D scatter plot. We computed positions jointly for both models and projected them into the same 2D space using cosine similariy as the distance measure. As we are interested in potential common wrong predictions between the models, we only visualize wrongly classified samples, and group them by two criteria: the model used (colorencoded) and the gold label (symbol-encoded).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 98,
"end": 125,
"text": "UMAP (McInnes et al., 2018)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Further Extension & Optimization",
"sec_num": "5.3"
},
{
"text": "Examining the visualization of Figure 1 (left) we observe that there is no overlap between the wrongly predicted labels of the two models. This means that training an ensemble model is a promising way forward. Additionally, through the interactive visualization, we are guided to the most suitable ensemble model. Particularly, we see some common patterns for the wrongly predicted labels for each of the models. The fine-tuned Q-ctxA-Embedding+speakerA has a better performance in predicting ISQ, whereby the decision seems to be influenced by the speaker feature (i.e., if the question and context-after have different speakers, the model predicts ISQ). However, the fine-tuned Q-ctxB-Embedding model seems to learn a pattern of a context-before being a question; in such cases, the target question is predicted as NISQ. In the ground truth we have ambiguous cases though, where questions have both patterns. Thus, although it seems that the two models fail on different instances and that they could thus be combined in an ensemble, they would alone likely fail in predicting the ambiguous/controversial question instances. Instead, surface and POS features of the questions and their contexts should be able to differentiate between some of the controversial cases. To test this, we created an ensemble model consisting of the two models and the best lexicalized model holding such features (Q+ctxB1+ctxA1). First, this ensemble model checks whether finetuned Q-ctxA-Embedding+speakerA and fine-tuned Q-ctxB-Embedding predict the same label. If so, it adopts this label too. Otherwise, it picks up the prediction of Q+ctxB1+ctxA1. With this ensemble approach, we are indeed able to improve our so-far best model by 4%, reaching an accuracy of 88.3%, as shown in the last entry of Table 3 .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 31,
"end": 39,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1784,
"end": 1791,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Further Extension & Optimization",
"sec_num": "5.3"
},
{
"text": "At this point, two questions arise. First, the reader might wonder whether this result means that the task is virtually \"solved\". Recall that the inter-annotator agreement was measured at 89.3% and thus, it might seem that our ensemble model is able to be competitive with that. However, this is not the case: if we observe the Fleiss Kappa, we see that it only demonstrates moderate agreement. This could be due to the difficulty of the task, as mentioned before, but it also shows that the task formulation has room for improvement. In a postannotation session, our annotators reported that some of the uncertainty and disagreement could be tackled with multi-modal data, where also audio or video data of the corresponding questions is provided. Additionally, higher agreement could have been achieved with more annotators. Thus, our current work offers room for improvement, while providing strong baselines. Second, the question is raised whether this feature combination is indeed the best setting for all purposes of this task; the answer to this depends on what the ultimate goal of this task is. If the ultimate goal is applicationbased, where a model needs to determine whether a question requires a factoid answer (or not) in a real-life conversation, the trained model should not include the context-after as a feature as this would exactly be what we want to determine based on the model's decision. However, if the goal is to automatically classify questions of a given corpus to generate linguistic insights, then the trained model can include all features. The evaluation undertaken here serves both these purposes by detailing all settings. On the one hand, we show that the models achieve high performance even when removing the context-after and that therefore an applicationbased setting is possible. On the other hand, we also discover which feature combination will lead to the best predictions, generating theoretical insights and enabling more research in this direction.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Further Extension & Optimization",
"sec_num": "5.3"
},
{
"text": "In this paper, we argued for the need of the Question-Type Identification task, in which questions are distinguished based on the communicative goals they are set to achieve. We also provided the first corpus to be used as a benchmark. Additionally, we studied the impact of different features and established diverse baselines, highlighting the peculiarities of the task. Finally, we were able to generate new insights, which we aim to take up on in our future work. Table 5 : Accuracy of the various classifiers and feature combinations (settings) on the entire RQueT corpus of 2000 questions. A checkmark means that this feature was present in this setting. PT stands for the pretrained BERT embeddings and FN for the fine-tuned ones. Bolded figures are the best performances across types of classifiers. The stared figure is the best performing ensemble model across settings. wOverAbs and wOverPerc are omitted for brevity.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 468,
"end": 475,
"text": "Table 5",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "http://transcripts.cnn.com/ TRANSCRIPTS/ 2 See https://github.com/kkalouli/RQueT",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Here we opt for the non-contextualized InferSent embeddings because contextualized embeddings like BERT inherently exhibit high similarities(Devlin et al., 2019).5 http://ankara.lti.cs.cmu.edu/side/",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "These settings are omitted from the table for brevity.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Although the unlexicalized features had shown no significant performance, they were added here to check for interaction effects between them and the lexicalized features.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "We thank the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) for funding within project BU 1806/10-2 \"Questions Visualized\" of the FOR2111 \"Questions at the Interfaces\". We also thank our annotators, as well as the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acknowledgements",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Appendix A: Performance Results on the entire RQueTThe following table collects all performance results when training on the entire RQueT corpus of 2000 questions. Although we cannot make this whole corpus available, we would like to report on the performance to show how our findings are parallel in both variants of the corpus and that the smaller size of the corpus we make available does not obscure the overall picture.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "annex",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "Real Life Application of a Question Answering System Using BERT Language Model",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Francesca",
"middle": [],
"last": "Alloatti",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Luigi",
"middle": [
"Di"
],
"last": "Caro",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Gianpiero",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sportelli",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2019,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 20th Annual SIGdial Meeting on Discourse and Dialogue",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "250--253",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.18653/v1/W19-5930"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Francesca Alloatti, Luigi Di Caro, and Gianpiero Sportelli. 2019. Real Life Application of a Question Answering System Using BERT Language Model. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual SIGdial Meeting on Discourse and Dialogue, pages 250-253, Stock- holm, Sweden. Association for Computational Lin- guistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "Discourse structure and dialogue acts in multiparty dialogue: the STAC corpus",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Nicholas",
"middle": [],
"last": "Asher",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Julie",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hunter",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Mathieu",
"middle": [],
"last": "Morey",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Benamara",
"middle": [],
"last": "Farah",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Stergos",
"middle": [],
"last": "Afantenos",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2016,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'16)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "2721--2727",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Nicholas Asher, Julie Hunter, Mathieu Morey, Bena- mara Farah, and Stergos Afantenos. 2016. Dis- course structure and dialogue acts in multiparty di- alogue: the STAC corpus. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Re- sources and Evaluation (LREC'16), pages 2721- 2727, Portoro\u017e, Slovenia. European Language Re- sources Association (ELRA).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "The intonation of English statements and questions",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Christine",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bartels",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1999,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Christine Bartels. 1999. The intonation of English statements and questions. New York: Garland Pub- lishing.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "Decomposing cornering effects: an experimental study",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Andrea",
"middle": [],
"last": "Beltrama",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Erlinde",
"middle": [],
"last": "Meertens",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Maribel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Romero",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2019,
"venue": "Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung",
"volume": "22",
"issue": "",
"pages": "175--190",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Andrea Beltrama, Erlinde Meertens, and Maribel Romero. 2019. Decomposing cornering effects: an experimental study. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeu- tung, 22(1):175-190.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "The recognition of declarative questions in information dialogues",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Robbert-Jan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Beun",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1989,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Robbert-Jan Beun. 1989. The recognition of declara- tive questions in information dialogues. Ph.D. the- sis, Tilburg University. Pagination: 139.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "Automatic Identification of Rhetorical Questions",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Shohini",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bhattasali",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jeremy",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cytryn",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Elana",
"middle": [],
"last": "Feldman",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Joonsuk",
"middle": [],
"last": "Park",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "743--749",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.3115/v1/P15-2122"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Shohini Bhattasali, Jeremy Cytryn, Elana Feldman, and Joonsuk Park. 2015. Automatic Identification of Rhetorical Questions. In Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Compu- tational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Vol- ume 2: Short Papers), pages 743-749, Beijing, China. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "Rhetorical questions: Severing asking from questioning. Semantics and Linguistic Theory",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Mar\u00eda",
"middle": [],
"last": "Biezma",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Kyle",
"middle": [],
"last": "Rawlins",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2017,
"venue": "",
"volume": "27",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.3765/salt.v27i0.4155"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Mar\u00eda Biezma and Kyle Rawlins. 2017. Rhetorical questions: Severing asking from questioning. Se- mantics and Linguistic Theory, 27:302.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "PARC's Bridge and Question Answering System",
"authors": [
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Daniel",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Bob",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bobrow",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Cleo",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cheslow",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Lauri",
"middle": [],
"last": "Condoravdi",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Tracy",
"middle": [
"Holloway"
],
"last": "Karttunen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Rowan",
"middle": [],
"last": "King",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Valeria",
"middle": [],
"last": "Nairn",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Charlotte",
"middle": [],
"last": "De Paiva",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Annie",
"middle": [],
"last": "Price",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zaenen",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2007,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Grammar Engineering Across Frameworks Workshop (GEAF 2007)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "46--66",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Daniel G. Bobrow, Bob Cheslow, Cleo Condoravdi, Lauri Karttunen, Tracy Holloway King, Rowan Nairn, Valeria de Paiva, Charlotte Price, and Annie Zaenen. 2007. PARC's Bridge and Question An- swering System. In Proceedings of the Grammar Engineering Across Frameworks Workshop (GEAF 2007), pages 46-66, Stanford, California, USA. CSLI Publications.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "Yes-no questions are not alternative questions",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Dwight",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bolinger",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1978,
"venue": "Questions",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "87--105",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Dwight Bolinger. 1978. Yes-no questions are not alternative questions. In Questions, pages 87-105. Springer.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "Kars Wijnhoven, and Alex Fang",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Harry",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bunt",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Volha",
"middle": [],
"last": "Petukhova",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Andrei",
"middle": [],
"last": "Malchanau",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2016,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'16)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "3151--3158",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Harry Bunt, Volha Petukhova, Andrei Malchanau, Kars Wijnhoven, and Alex Fang. 2016. The Di- alogBank. In Proceedings of the Tenth Inter- national Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'16), pages 3151-3158, Portoro\u017e, Slovenia. European Language Resources Associa- tion (ELRA).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Negative Transportation and Tag Questions",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ray",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cattell",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1973,
"venue": "Language",
"volume": "49",
"issue": "3",
"pages": "612--639",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ray Cattell. 1973. Negative Transportation and Tag Questions. Language, 49(3):612-639.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "BERT for Question Generation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ying-Hong",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chan",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Yao-Chung",
"middle": [],
"last": "Fan",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2019,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Natural Language Generation",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "173--177",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.18653/v1/W19-8624"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ying-Hong Chan and Yao-Chung Fan. 2019. BERT for Question Generation. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Natural Language Gen- eration, pages 173-177, Tokyo, Japan. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "Supervised Learning of Universal Sentence Representations from Natural Language Inference Data",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Alexis",
"middle": [],
"last": "Conneau",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Douwe",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kiela",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Holger",
"middle": [],
"last": "Schwenk",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Lo\u00efc",
"middle": [],
"last": "Barrault",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Antoine",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bordes",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2017,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "670--680",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Alexis Conneau, Douwe Kiela, Holger Schwenk, Lo\u00efc Barrault, and Antoine Bordes. 2017. Supervised Learning of Universal Sentence Representations from Natural Language Inference Data. In Proceed- ings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 670-680, Copenhagen, Denmark. Association for Computa- tional Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "Questions",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Veneeta",
"middle": [],
"last": "Dayal",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2016,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Veneeta Dayal. 2016. Questions. Oxford University Press, Oxford.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Jacob",
"middle": [],
"last": "Devlin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ming-Wei",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Kenton",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lee",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Kristina",
"middle": [],
"last": "Toutanova",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2019,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies",
"volume": "1",
"issue": "",
"pages": "4171--4186",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.18653/v1/N19-1423"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2019. BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Un- derstanding. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers), pages 4171-4186, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Associ- ation for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"title": "Conjectural questions: The case of German verb-final wohl questions",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Regine",
"middle": [
"Eckardt"
],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2020,
"venue": "",
"volume": "13",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1--17",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.3765/sp.13.9"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Regine Eckardt. 2020. Conjectural questions: The case of German verb-final wohl questions. Semantics and Pragmatics, 13:1-17.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF16": {
"ref_id": "b16",
"title": "Watson: Beyond Jeopardy! Artificial Intelligence",
"authors": [
{
"first": "David",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ferrucci",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Anthony",
"middle": [],
"last": "Levas",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Sugato",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bagchi",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "David",
"middle": [],
"last": "Gondek",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Erik",
"middle": [
"T"
],
"last": "Mueller",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2013,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "93--105",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.1016/j.artint.2012.06.009"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "David Ferrucci, Anthony Levas, Sugato Bagchi, David Gondek, and Erik T. Mueller. 2013. Wat- son: Beyond Jeopardy! Artificial Intelligence, 199-200(1):93-105.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF17": {
"ref_id": "b17",
"title": "Facts or Friends? Distinguishing Informational and Conversational Questions in Social Q&A Sites",
"authors": [
{
"first": "F",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Harper",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Moy",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Konstan",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2009,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "759--768",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "F.M. Harper, D. Moy, and J. A. Konstan. 2009. Facts or Friends? Distinguishing Informational and Conver- sational Questions in Social Q&A Sites. In Proceed- ings of the Conference on Human Factors in Com- puting Systems (CHI 2009), pages 759-768.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF18": {
"ref_id": "b18",
"title": "A conversational interface for self-screening for adhd in adults",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Robin",
"middle": [],
"last": "H\u00e5vik",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jo",
"middle": [
"Dugstad"
],
"last": "Wake",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Eivind",
"middle": [],
"last": "Flobak",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Astri",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lundervold",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Frode",
"middle": [],
"last": "Guribye",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2019,
"venue": "Internet Science",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "133--144",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Robin H\u00e5vik, Jo Dugstad Wake, Eivind Flobak, Astri Lundervold, and Frode Guribye. 2019. A conversa- tional interface for self-screening for adhd in adults. In Internet Science, pages 133-144, Cham. Springer International Publishing.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF19": {
"ref_id": "b19",
"title": "What Does BERT Learn about the Structure of Language?",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ganesh",
"middle": [],
"last": "Jawahar",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Beno\u00eet",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sagot",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Djam\u00e9",
"middle": [],
"last": "Seddah",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2019,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "3651--3657",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.18653/v1/P19-1356"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ganesh Jawahar, Beno\u00eet Sagot, and Djam\u00e9 Seddah. 2019. What Does BERT Learn about the Structure of Language? In Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Lin- guistics, pages 3651-3657, Florence, Italy. Associa- tion for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF20": {
"ref_id": "b20",
"title": "Switchboard SWBD-DAMSL shallow-discourse-function annotation coders manual",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Jurafsky",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [],
"last": "Shriberg",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Biasca",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1997,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "D. Jurafsky, E. Shriberg, and D. Biasca. 1997. Switch- board SWBD-DAMSL shallow-discourse-function annotation coders manual. Technical Report Draft 13, University of Colorado, Institute of Cognitive Science.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF21": {
"ref_id": "b21",
"title": "A Multilingual Approach to Question Classification",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Aikaterini-Lida",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kalouli",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Katharina",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kaiser",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Annette",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hautli-Janisz",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Georg",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Kaiser",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Miriam",
"middle": [],
"last": "Butt",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2018,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Aikaterini-Lida Kalouli, Katharina Kaiser, Annette Hautli-Janisz, Georg A. Kaiser, and Miriam Butt. 2018. A Multilingual Approach to Question Classifi- cation. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018), Miyazaki, Japan. European Language Resources Association (ELRA).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF22": {
"ref_id": "b22",
"title": "Question Identification on Twitter",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Baichuan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Li",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Xiance",
"middle": [],
"last": "Si",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Michael",
"middle": [
"R"
],
"last": "Lyu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Irwin",
"middle": [],
"last": "King",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Edward",
"middle": [
"Y"
],
"last": "Chang",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2011,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 20th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, CIKM '11",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "2477--2480",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.1145/2063576.2063996"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Baichuan Li, Xiance Si, Michael R. Lyu, Irwin King, and Edward Y. Chang. 2011. Question Identification on Twitter. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM Inter- national Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, CIKM '11, page 2477-2480, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machin- ery.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF23": {
"ref_id": "b23",
"title": "Open Sesame: Getting inside BERT's Linguistic Knowledge",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Yongjie",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Yi",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chern Tan",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Robert",
"middle": [],
"last": "Frank",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2019,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2019 ACL Workshop BlackboxNLP: Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "241--253",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.18653/v1/W19-4825"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Yongjie Lin, Yi Chern Tan, and Robert Frank. 2019. Open Sesame: Getting inside BERT's Linguistic Knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACL Work- shop BlackboxNLP: Analyzing and Interpreting Neu- ral Networks for NLP, pages 241-253, Florence, Italy. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF24": {
"ref_id": "b24",
"title": "A fully automated conversational agent for promoting mental well-being: A pilot RCT using mixed methods",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Hoa",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kien",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ann-Marie",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ly",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Gerhard",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ly",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Andersson",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2017,
"venue": "Internet Interventions",
"volume": "10",
"issue": "",
"pages": "39--46",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.1016/j.invent.2017.10.002"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kien Hoa Ly, Ann-Marie Ly, and Gerhard Andersson. 2017. A fully automated conversational agent for promoting mental well-being: A pilot RCT using mixed methods. Internet Interventions, 10:39-46.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF25": {
"ref_id": "b25",
"title": "UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Leland",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mcinnes",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "John",
"middle": [],
"last": "Healy",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Nathaniel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Saul",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Lukas",
"middle": [],
"last": "Grossberger",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2018,
"venue": "The Journal of Open Source Software",
"volume": "3",
"issue": "29",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Leland McInnes, John Healy, Nathaniel Saul, and Lukas Grossberger. 2018. UMAP: Uniform Mani- fold Approximation and Projection. The Journal of Open Source Software, 3(29):861.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF26": {
"ref_id": "b26",
"title": "Towards unsupervised recognition of dialogue acts",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Nicole",
"middle": [],
"last": "Novielli",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Carlo",
"middle": [],
"last": "Strapparava",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2009,
"venue": "Proceedings of Human Language Technologies: The 2009 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Companion Volume: Student Research Workshop and Doctoral Consortium",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "84--89",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Nicole Novielli and Carlo Strapparava. 2009. To- wards unsupervised recognition of dialogue acts. In Proceedings of Human Language Technologies: The 2009 Annual Conference of the North Ameri- can Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Companion Volume: Student Research Workshop and Doctoral Consortium, pages 84-89, Boulder, Colorado. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF27": {
"ref_id": "b27",
"title": "What is a question? Crowdsourcing tweet categorization",
"authors": [
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sharoda",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Lichan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Paul",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ed",
"middle": [
"H"
],
"last": "Hong",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chi",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2011,
"venue": "CHI 2011, Workshop on Crowdsourcing and Human Computation",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sharoda A. Paul, Lichan Hong, and Ed H. Chi. 2011. What is a question? Crowdsourcing tweet catego- rization. In CHI 2011, Workshop on Crowdsourcing and Human Computation.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF28": {
"ref_id": "b28",
"title": "Identifying Rhetorical Questions in Social Media",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Suhas",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ranganath",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Xia",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jiliang",
"middle": [],
"last": "Tang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Huan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Suhangwang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Liu",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2016,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 10th International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Suhas Ranganath, Xia Hu, Jiliang Tang, SuhangWang, and Huan Liu. 2016. Identifying Rhetorical Ques- tions in Social Media. In Proceedings of the 10th International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM 2016).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF29": {
"ref_id": "b29",
"title": "Queclaratives",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Jerrold",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sadock",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1971,
"venue": "Papers from the 7th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "223--232",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Jerrold Sadock. 1971. Queclaratives. In Papers from the 7th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, pages 223-232.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF30": {
"ref_id": "b30",
"title": "Neural Question Generation using Interrogative Phrases",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Yuichi",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sasazawa",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Sho",
"middle": [],
"last": "Takase",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Naoaki",
"middle": [],
"last": "Okazaki",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2019,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Natural Language Generation",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "106--111",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.18653/v1/W19-8613"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Yuichi Sasazawa, Sho Takase, and Naoaki Okazaki. 2019. Neural Question Generation using Interrog- ative Phrases. In Proceedings of the 12th Interna- tional Conference on Natural Language Generation, pages 106-111, Tokyo, Japan. Association for Com- putational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF31": {
"ref_id": "b31",
"title": "CNN Transcripts",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Gaurav",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sood",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2000,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.7910/DVN/ISDPJU"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Gaurav Sood. 2017. CNN Transcripts 2000-2014. Published by Harvard Dataverse, retrieved from https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/ISDPJU.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF32": {
"ref_id": "b32",
"title": "Generalizing Question Answering System with Pretrained Language Model Fine-tuning",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Dan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Su",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Yan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Xu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Genta",
"middle": [],
"last": "Indra Winata",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Peng",
"middle": [],
"last": "Xu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Hyeondey",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kim",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Zihan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Liu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Pascale",
"middle": [],
"last": "Fung",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2019,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Machine Reading for Question Answering",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "203--211",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.18653/v1/D19-5827"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Dan Su, Yan Xu, Genta Indra Winata, Peng Xu, Hyeondey Kim, Zihan Liu, and Pascale Fung. 2019. Generalizing Question Answering System with Pre- trained Language Model Fine-tuning. In Proceed- ings of the 2nd Workshop on Machine Reading for Question Answering, pages 203-211, Hong Kong, China. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF33": {
"ref_id": "b33",
"title": "Feature-Rich Partof-Speech Tagging with a Cyclic Dependency Network",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Kristina",
"middle": [],
"last": "Toutanova",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Klein",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Christopher",
"middle": [
"D"
],
"last": "Manning",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Yoram",
"middle": [],
"last": "Singer",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2003,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2003 Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "252--259",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kristina Toutanova, Dan Klein, Christopher D. Man- ning, and Yoram Singer. 2003. Feature-Rich Part- of-Speech Tagging with a Cyclic Dependency Net- work. In Proceedings of the 2003 Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chap- ter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 252-259.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF34": {
"ref_id": "b34",
"title": "GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understanding",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Alex",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Amanpreet",
"middle": [],
"last": "Singh",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Julian",
"middle": [],
"last": "Michael",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Felix",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hill",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Omer",
"middle": [],
"last": "Levy",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Samuel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bowman",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2018,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2018 EMNLP Workshop Black-boxNLP: Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "353--355",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.18653/v1/W18-5446"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Alex Wang, Amanpreet Singh, Julian Michael, Fe- lix Hill, Omer Levy, and Samuel Bowman. 2018. GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Plat- form for Natural Language Understanding. In Proceedings of the 2018 EMNLP Workshop Black- boxNLP: Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Net- works for NLP, pages 353-355, Brussels, Belgium. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF35": {
"ref_id": "b35",
"title": "Exploiting salient patterns for question detection and question retrieval in community based question answering",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Kai",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Tat-Seng",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chua",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2010,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING10)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1155--1163",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kai Wang and Tat-Seng Chua. 2010. Exploiting salient patterns for question detection and question retrieval in community based question answering. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING10), page 1155-1163.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF36": {
"ref_id": "b36",
"title": "Deliberative questions. Analysis",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [
"M O"
],
"last": "Wheatley",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1955,
"venue": "",
"volume": "15",
"issue": "",
"pages": "49--60",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "J. M. O. Wheatley. 1955. Deliberative questions. Anal- ysis, 15(3):49-60.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF37": {
"ref_id": "b37",
"title": "Questions about Questions: An Empirical Analysis of Information Needs on Twitter",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Zhe",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zhao",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Qiaozhu",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mei",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2013,
"venue": "Proceedings of the International World Wide Web Conference Committee (IW3C2)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1545--1555",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Zhe Zhao and Qiaozhu Mei. 2013. Questions about Questions: An Empirical Analysis of Information Needs on Twitter. In Proceedings of the Inter- national World Wide Web Conference Committee (IW3C2), pages 1545-1555.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF38": {
"ref_id": "b38",
"title": "Extraction and Analysis of non-canonical Questions from a Twitter-Corpus. Master's thesis",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Mark-Matthias",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zymla",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2014,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Mark-Matthias Zymla. 2014. Extraction and Analysis of non-canonical Questions from a Twitter-Corpus. Master's thesis, University of Konstanz.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"TABREF0": {
"text": "Distribution of question type in the shortened and the entire RQueT corpus, respectively.",
"num": null,
"html": null,
"content": "<table/>",
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF2": {
"text": "Structural features with the most influence in the model Q+ctxB1+ctxA1.",
"num": null,
"html": null,
"content": "<table/>",
"type_str": "table"
}
}
}
} |