File size: 123,275 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 |
{
"paper_id": "O08-3001",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T08:02:11.217226Z"
},
"title": "Exploring Shallow Answer Ranking Features in Cross-Lingual and Monolingual Factoid Question Answering",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Cheng-Wei",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lee",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "National Tsing-Hua University",
"location": {
"addrLine": "Section 2, Kuang-Fu Road",
"postCode": "101",
"settlement": "Hsinchu",
"region": "R.O.C",
"country": "Taiwan, Taiwan, R.O.C"
}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Yi-Hsun",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lee",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Wen-Lian",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hsu",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "Academia Sinica",
"location": {
"addrLine": "128 Academia Road, Section 2, Nankang, Taipei 115",
"region": "R.O.C",
"country": "Taiwan, Taiwan, R.O.C"
}
},
"email": "hsu@iis.sinica.edu.tw"
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "Answer ranking is critical to a QA (Question Answering) system because it determines the final system performance. In this paper, we explore the behavior of shallow ranking features under different conditions. The features are easy to implement and are also suitable when complex NLP techniques or resources are not available for monolingual or cross-lingual tasks. We analyze six shallow ranking features, namely, SCO-QAT, keyword overlap, density, IR score, mutual information score, and answer frequency. SCO-QAT (Sum of Co-occurrence of Question and Answer Terms) is a new feature proposed by us that performed well in NTCIR CLQA. It is a co-occurrence based feature that does not need extra knowledge, word-ignoring heuristic rules, or special tools. Instead, for the whole corpus, SCO-QAT calculates co-occurrence scores based solely on the passage retrieval results. Our experiments show that there is no perfect shallow ranking feature for every condition. SCO-QAT performs the best in CC (Chinese-Chinese) QA, but it is not a good choice in E-C (English-Chinese) QA. Overall, Frequency is the best choice for E-C QA, but its performance is impaired when translation noise is present. We also found that passage depth has little impact on shallow ranking features, and that a proper answer filter with fined-grained answer types is important for E-C QA. We measured the performance of answer ranking in terms of a newly proposed metric EAA (Expected Answer Accuracy) to cope with cases of answers that have the same score after ranking.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "O08-3001",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "Answer ranking is critical to a QA (Question Answering) system because it determines the final system performance. In this paper, we explore the behavior of shallow ranking features under different conditions. The features are easy to implement and are also suitable when complex NLP techniques or resources are not available for monolingual or cross-lingual tasks. We analyze six shallow ranking features, namely, SCO-QAT, keyword overlap, density, IR score, mutual information score, and answer frequency. SCO-QAT (Sum of Co-occurrence of Question and Answer Terms) is a new feature proposed by us that performed well in NTCIR CLQA. It is a co-occurrence based feature that does not need extra knowledge, word-ignoring heuristic rules, or special tools. Instead, for the whole corpus, SCO-QAT calculates co-occurrence scores based solely on the passage retrieval results. Our experiments show that there is no perfect shallow ranking feature for every condition. SCO-QAT performs the best in CC (Chinese-Chinese) QA, but it is not a good choice in E-C (English-Chinese) QA. Overall, Frequency is the best choice for E-C QA, but its performance is impaired when translation noise is present. We also found that passage depth has little impact on shallow ranking features, and that a proper answer filter with fined-grained answer types is important for E-C QA. We measured the performance of answer ranking in terms of a newly proposed metric EAA (Expected Answer Accuracy) to cope with cases of answers that have the same score after ranking.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "In recent years, question answering (QA) has become a key research area in several of the world's major languages, possibly because of the urgent need to deal with the information overload caused by the rapid growth of the Internet. Since 1999, many international question answering contests have been held at conferences and workshops, such as TREC 1 , CLEF 2 , and NTCIR 3 . Thus far, several languages -such as Bulgarian, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Indonesian, Italian, Japanese, Portuguese, and Spanish -have been tested in monolingual or cross-lingual question answering tasks. In QA research, questions are usually classified into several categories, such as factoid questions, list questions, and definition questions, then dealt with by different techniques. Among these categories, factoid questions have been studied the most widely, and they are the focus of this paper.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "There is usually exactly one answer, which is a noun or short phrase, for a factoid question. For example, \"Who is the president of the United States?\" is a factoid question because the name of the president is a noun, and there is only one current U.S. President. Factoid questions are usually classified into questions types, such as Q_PERSON, Q_LOCATION, Q_ORGANIZATION, Q_ARTIFACT, Q_TIME, and Q_NUMBER [Lee et al. 2007; Lee et al. 2005] . Although question types vary in different contests and different systems, the corresponding answer types can usually be recognized by named entity recognition (NER) techniques or simple rules.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 407,
"end": 424,
"text": "[Lee et al. 2007;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
},
{
"start": 425,
"end": 441,
"text": "Lee et al. 2005]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "A QA system is normally comprised of several modules. The answer ranking module implements the last step in answering a factoid question and determines the final performance. After candidate answers have been extracted from retrieved passages, the answer ranking module takes the question, the passages (or documents), and the candidate answers as input, ranks the candidate answers, and then outputs a ranked list of candidate answers. Although several answer ranking methods have been proposed, they can be generally categorized as either deep or shallow methods. A deep method uses complex NLP techniques and may require extensive rules, ontologies, or human effort, while a shallow method does not require much of these resources and is therefore cheaper to implement.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "Although deep answer ranking methods have proven useful for English QA, as reported in [Cui et al. 2005; Harabagiu et al. 2005] , the resources needed for such methods are usually not available for some languages in monolingual or cross-lingual QA. In those cases, shallow ranking methods have to be used; however, to the best of our knowledge, very little research has been done on such methods. The situation is worse for cross-lingual tasks because most cross-lingual QA research has focused on the front-end modules, i.e., question processing and passage retrieval. Research on back-end modules, such as answer ranking, has received little attention in the cross-lingual QA domain.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 87,
"end": 104,
"text": "[Cui et al. 2005;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
},
{
"start": 105,
"end": 127,
"text": "Harabagiu et al. 2005]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "In this paper, we attempt to fill this research gap by exploring the behavior of shallow ranking features under noise produced by other QA modules in both monolingual and cross-lingual situations. Herein, noise is defined in terms of the performance decrement of a QA module. For example, in the case of translation quality decrement, we say that we encounter translation noise and expect that the noise may impact the performance of some shallow ranking features. In addition to translation noise, we also consider passage retrieval noise and answer filter noise. We measure the influence of these types of noise by three performance metrics to determine which ranking feature is the most effective in dealing with each kind of noise.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "Apart from considering widely used shallow ranking features, we propose a new ranking feature called SCO-QAT, which has been successfully applied to the ASQA2 system [Lee et al. 2007] , and also achieved the best performance on the C-C and E-C subtasks in NTCIR-6 CLQA [Sasaki et al. 2007] . SCO-QAT is a co-occurrence based feature; however, unlike some co-occurrence features [Magnini et al. 2001] , it does not need extra knowledge, word-ignoring heuristic rules, or special tools.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 166,
"end": 183,
"text": "[Lee et al. 2007]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
},
{
"start": 269,
"end": 289,
"text": "[Sasaki et al. 2007]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF19"
},
{
"start": 378,
"end": 399,
"text": "[Magnini et al. 2001]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Related works are discussed in Section 2. We introduce the SCO-QAT feature in Section 3. The evaluation metrics used are introduced in Section 4. The ASQA2 system used in our experiments is described in Section 5. We detail our experiment results and compare SCO-QAT with other shallow features in Section 6. Then, we present our conclusions in Section 7.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "Answer Ranking approaches can be divided in to deep and shallow methods. Deep approaches involve sophisticated tools or knowledge. The most advanced deep methods are logic-based and dependency-parser-based. The LCC team [Harabagiu et al. 2005] used an abductive inference method to evaluate the correctness of an answer according to the logic form of the question, the logic form of the sentence that supports the answer, and background knowledge from WordNet. The logic-based approach has achieved the best QA performance in TREC for several years.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 220,
"end": 243,
"text": "[Harabagiu et al. 2005]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2."
},
{
"text": "Dependency-parser-based methods have also performed quite well on TREC tasks. The National University of Singapore team [Cui et al. 2005] used dependency relations identified by a dependency parser to select answer nuggets for factoid and list questions. The similarity between the question and the supporting passage is calculated by machine translation models. Shen [Shen et al. 2006 ] also used dependency relations, but incorporated them into a Maximum Entropy-based ranking model. Although these deep approaches perform well on monolingual QA (about 0.7 accuracy), they are quite demanding in terms of linguistic resources and computational complexity. In cross-lingual or multilingual QA, it is usually impossible to employ deep approaches for some languages due to the lack of knowledge resources or tools. In contrast, approaches with shallow features are much more flexible when QA languages are changed. The following are some commonly used shallow approaches.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 120,
"end": 137,
"text": "[Cui et al. 2005]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
},
{
"start": 368,
"end": 385,
"text": "[Shen et al. 2006",
"ref_id": "BIBREF20"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2."
},
{
"text": "Surface patterns [Soubbotin and Soubbotin 2001] have been successful in the TREC QA Track, which uses string patterns to match questions with correct answers. However, from our perspective, if surface patterns are manually created, the method can not be regarded as \"shallow\", because it is likely labor intensive. Although there are some \"shallow\" variations [Geleijnse and Korst 2006; Ravichandran and Hovy 2002 ] that attempt to create surface patterns automatically/semi-automatically, they usually suffer from the low coverage problem, which means they can only be applied to a few questions.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 17,
"end": 47,
"text": "[Soubbotin and Soubbotin 2001]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
},
{
"start": 360,
"end": 386,
"text": "[Geleijnse and Korst 2006;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
},
{
"start": 387,
"end": 413,
"text": "Ravichandran and Hovy 2002",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2."
},
{
"text": "Some approaches focus on local information, thus only take the similarity between a passage and the question into account when finding relevant answers. The simplest way to measure the similarity is by counting the ratio of question terms occurring in the answer passage, as has been reported [Cooper and Ruger 2000; Molla and Gardiner 2005; Zhao et al. 2005] . Kwok [Kwok and Deng 2006] and AnswerBus [Zheng 2002 ] adopt the IR score of the answer passage directly as a measure of similarity. Intuitively, the closeness of two terms may indicate a relation; therefore, some systems [Gillard et al. 2006; Sacaleanu and Neumann 2006; Tom\u00b4as et al. 2005] use features based on the distance between the answer and the question terms to obtain a better similarity measurement. Among these approaches, those of Lin et al. and Roussinov et al. [Roussinov et al. 2004] incorporate the IDF value with term distances. The assumption is that, if the candidate answer is close to several keywords or question terms, it is more likely to be relevant.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 293,
"end": 316,
"text": "[Cooper and Ruger 2000;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
},
{
"start": 317,
"end": 341,
"text": "Molla and Gardiner 2005;",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 342,
"end": 359,
"text": "Zhao et al. 2005]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 362,
"end": 366,
"text": "Kwok",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 367,
"end": 387,
"text": "[Kwok and Deng 2006]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 402,
"end": 413,
"text": "[Zheng 2002",
"ref_id": "BIBREF24"
},
{
"start": 583,
"end": 604,
"text": "[Gillard et al. 2006;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
},
{
"start": 605,
"end": 632,
"text": "Sacaleanu and Neumann 2006;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF17"
},
{
"start": 633,
"end": 652,
"text": "Tom\u00b4as et al. 2005]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF22"
},
{
"start": 821,
"end": 861,
"text": "Roussinov et al. [Roussinov et al. 2004]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF16"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2."
},
{
"text": "Instead of utilizing local information, which only considers the question and a passage, redundancy-based features consider all the returned passages or the entire corpus. Clarke [Clarke et al. 2001] suggested that redundancy could be used as a substitute for deep analysis because correct answers may appear many times in high-ranking passages. Features using frequency or co-occurrence information are all regarded as redundancy-based. Several systems [Clarke et al. 2002; Cooper and Ruger 2000; Kwok and Deng 2006; Zhao et al. Cross-Lingual and Monolingual Factoid Question Answering 2005; Zheng 2002] include answer frequency in their Answer Ranking components. A web-based co-occurrence shallow feature developed by Magnini et al. [Magnini et al. 2001] has been successfully applied on the TREC dataset. Magnini used three methods, Pointwise Mutual Information, Maximal Likelihood Ratio, and Corrected Conditional Probability, to measure the co-occurrence of each answer and the given question based on Web search results. However, to use Magnini's method, we also need some word-ignoring heuristic rules to remove search keywords when the number of returned web pages is insufficient.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 179,
"end": 199,
"text": "[Clarke et al. 2001]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
},
{
"start": 454,
"end": 474,
"text": "[Clarke et al. 2002;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
},
{
"start": 475,
"end": 497,
"text": "Cooper and Ruger 2000;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
},
{
"start": 498,
"end": 517,
"text": "Kwok and Deng 2006;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 518,
"end": 592,
"text": "Zhao et al. Cross-Lingual and Monolingual Factoid Question Answering 2005;",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 593,
"end": 604,
"text": "Zheng 2002]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF24"
},
{
"start": 721,
"end": 757,
"text": "Magnini et al. [Magnini et al. 2001]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2."
},
{
"text": "Before comparing shallow ranking features, we define the SCO-QAT ranking feature that was applied successfully in the ASQA2 system at NTCIR-6. SCO-QAT relies on co-occurrence information about question terms and answer terms, and is therefore similar to Magnini's approach [Magnini et al. 2001] . However, unlike Magnini's approach, which utilizes the Web as a corpus to help answer questions posed on a local corpus, SCO-QAT uses passages retrieved by the passage retrieval module from the local corpus directly and does not use any word-ignoring rules.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 273,
"end": 294,
"text": "[Magnini et al. 2001]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The SCO-QAT Ranking Feature",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "The basic assumption of SCO-QAT is that, with good quality passages, the more often an answer co-occurs with question terms, the higher the probability that it is correct. Next, we describe the SCO-QAT function. Let the given answer be A and the given question be Q, where Q consists of a set, QT, of question terms {qt 1 , qt 2 , qt 3 , \u2026\u2026, qt n }. Based on QT, we define QC as a set of question term combinations, or more precisely {qc i | qc i is a subset of QT and qc i is not empty}. We also define a freq(X) function of a set X to indicate the number of retrieved passages in which all elements of X co-occur. The relation confidence is calculated as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The SCO-QAT Ranking Feature",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "( , ) , if ( ) 0 ( ) ( , ) 0, if ( ) 0 i i i i i freq qc A freq qc freq qc Conf qc A freq qc \u23a7 \u2260 \u23aa = \u23a8 \u23aa = \u23a9 .",
"eq_num": "(1)"
}
],
"section": "The SCO-QAT Ranking Feature",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "Then, the SCO-QAT formula is defined as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The SCO-QAT Ranking Feature",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "1 ( ) ( , ) QC i i SCO -QAT A Conf qc A = = \u2211 .",
"eq_num": "(2)"
}
],
"section": "The SCO-QAT Ranking Feature",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "For example, given a question Q consisting of three question terms {qt1, qt2, qt3} and a corresponding answer set {c1, c2}, the retrieved passages are presented as follows:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The SCO-QAT Ranking Feature",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "P1: qt1 qt2 c2 P2: qt1 qt2 qt3 c1 P3: qt1 qt2 c1 P4: qt1 c2 P5: qt2 c2 P6: qt1 qt3 c1 .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The SCO-QAT Ranking Feature",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "We use Equation 2to calculate the candidate answer's SCO-QAT score as follows: Since the SCO-QAT score of c1 is higher than that of c2, c1 is considered a better answer candidate than c2.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The SCO-QAT Ranking Feature",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "77 5 1 1 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 3 3 , 2 , 1 1 , 3 , 2 , 1 3 , 2 1 , 3 , 2 3 , 1 1 , 3 , 1 2 , 1 1 , 2 , 1 3 1 , 3 2 1 , 2 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 2 2 . )",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The SCO-QAT Ranking Feature",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "The rationale behind SCO-QAT is that we try to use retrieved passages as a resource to look up question terms and locate the correct answer. When a set of question terms QT co-occurs with an answer A, we can infer that some kind of relation exists between the QT set and the answer A, which could be helpful for identifying correct answers. However, as this kind of relation is not always correct, we have to find a way to deal with noisy relations. To this end, we use the confidence score shown in Equation 1to measure the goodness of a rule, which is similar to the method used for finding association rules. Then, we take the sum of the confidence scores of all the co-occurrences of all question term combinations to resolve the noisy rule problem. This technique is useful if the returned passages contain a lot of redundant information about the given question and the answer.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The SCO-QAT Ranking Feature",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "In this section, we describe the evaluation metrics used in this paper.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluation Metrics",
"sec_num": "4."
},
{
"text": "Two metrics, R-Accuracy and RU-Accuracy, are used to measure QA performance in NTCIR CLQA. A QA system returns a list of ranked answer responses for each question, but R-accuracy and RU-accuracy only consider the correctness of the top-1 ranked answer response on the list. An answer response is a pair comprised of an answer and its source document. Each answer response is judged as Right, Unsupported, or Wrong, as defined in the",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "R-Accuracy and RU-Accuracy",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "NTCIR-6 CLQA overview [Lee et al. 2007] :",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 22,
"end": 39,
"text": "[Lee et al. 2007]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Cross-Lingual and Monolingual Factoid Question Answering",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "\"Right (R): the answer is correct and the source document supports it.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Cross-Lingual and Monolingual Factoid Question Answering",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Unsupported (U): the answer is correct, but the source document cannot support it as a correct answer. That is, there is insufficient information in the document for users to confirm by themselves that the answer is the correct one.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Cross-Lingual and Monolingual Factoid Question Answering",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Based on these criteria, the accuracy is calculated as the number of correctly answered questions divided by the total number of questions. R-accuracy means that only \"Right\" judgments are regarded as correct, while RU-accurakcy means that both \"Right\" and \"Unsupported\" judgments are counted. As R-accuracy only occurs a few times in this paper, we use \"accuracy\" to refer to RU-accuracy when the context is not ambiguous. the number of questions for which the top1 rank answer is Right number of questions R Accuracy \u2212 = the number of questions for which the top1 rank answer is Right or Unsupported number of questions RU Accuracy \u2212 =",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Wrong (W): the answer \"is incorrect.\"",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We use MRR when we want to measure QA performance based on all the highest ranked correct answers, not only the top1 answer. MRR is calculated as follows: In addition to using the normal answer accuracy metrics, we propose a new metric called the Expected Answer Accuracy (EAA). We use EAA for cases where there are several top answers with the same ranking score.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR)",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The EAA score of a ranking method is defined as follows:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR)",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "1 number of correct answers with top1 rank score number of questions number of answers with top1 rank score",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR)",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "i question EAA = \u2211 Translation Cost",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR)",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We use the \"translation cost\" metric to measure the cost of introducing the cross-lingual function to a QA system. It is calculated as follows:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR)",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "accuracy of crosslingual QA -accuracy of monolingual QA accuracy of monolingual QA TranslationCost =",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR)",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "To evaluate answer ranking features, we chose the Academia Sinica Question Answering (ASQA) system as the testbed system for our experiment because it is modular and it performs well. Moreover, we can easily input different types of noise by adjusting the QA modules in ASQA. The system was developed by Academia Sinica 4 to deal with Chinese related QA tasks. The first version, ASQA1, can only deal with C-C QA, though. ASQA2, which is an extension of ASQA1, can deal with both C-C and E-C QA. We used ASQA1 in NTCIR-5 CLQA and ASQA2 in NTCIR-6 CLQA. NTCIR CLQA is the only QA contest in the world that focuses on Asian languages.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Testbed System: the ASQA2 Question Answering System",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "On the C-C and E-C subtasks in NTCIR-6 CLQA, ASQA2 achieved the best performance with 0.553 and 0.34 RU-Accuracy, respectively. The system consists of several modules, as shown in Figure 1 . In Question Processing, ASQA2 uses SVMs (Support Vector Machines) and syntax rules to identify the input question type and infer the expected answer types. The type taxonomy has 6 coarse-grained and 62 fined-grained answer types. For passage retrieval, we use Lucene 5 , an open source IR engine. The passage depth (the largest number of passages returned by the Passage Retrieval module) for each question is 100. Answers are then extracted from the returned passages by a fined-grained NER engine, and Normally, a cross-lingual QA system is constructed by modifying some components of a monolingual system; however, since translation is involved, the approach often results in performance deterioration. The degree of performance deterioration is usually used with the accuracy metric to evaluate the effectiveness of a cross-lingual system. We define the performance deterioration in terms of the translation cost, which is defined in Section 4. Figure 2 shows the translation cost of systems in NTCIR-6 CLQA. When measuring the RU-Accuracy, the translation cost of ASQA2 ranks third, only slightly lower than the system in second place. Therefore, we consider that ASQA2 is an acceptable platform for our mono-lingual and cross-lingual experiments.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 458,
"end": 459,
"text": "5",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 180,
"end": 188,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1140,
"end": 1148,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Testbed System: the ASQA2 Question Answering System",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "-100% -90% -80% -70% -60% -50% -40% -30% -20% -10% 0% ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Testbed System: the ASQA2 Question Answering System",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "According to the ASQA2 working notes [Lee et al. 2007] , the system's success is attributable to three techniques: English question classification, answer template-based answer filtering, and answer ranking with the SCO-QAT feature. When the answer template-based answer filter is applied, it removes all the candidates except the one it deems correct. As it is impossible to compare ranking methods when there is only one answer, we removed the answer template-based filter so that it would not influence our analysis of the answer ranking features.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 37,
"end": 54,
"text": "[Lee et al. 2007]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Figure 2. Translation costs of NTCIR-6 CLQA systems for factoid questions. The translation cost is calculated as the performance difference between cross-lingual and mono-lingual systems, divided by the mono-lingual performance.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We conducted four experiments to explore the behavior of SCO-QAT and other shallow ranking features. In Experiment 1, we observed how shallow ranking features perform when a monolingual QA system is extended to a cross-lingual system. In Experiments 2, 3, and 4, we simulated situations where noise is introduced from the front-end modules and tried to determine which ranking feature is the most suitable under each kind of noise.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments",
"sec_num": "6."
},
{
"text": "Our testbed system is composed of several modules. Having described the system architecture in Section 5, we now elaborate on the dependencies between the experimental variables. First, we analyze the testbed system to identify several experimental variables and determine their interdependency, as shown in Figure 3 . We are interested in the variables in bold font, as they will be used as independent or dependent variables in our experiments. The variables in gray font are not of interest because they are always controlled in the experiments. We provide details of the interdependency of the variables next.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 308,
"end": 316,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Variable Dependencies",
"sec_num": "6.1"
},
{
"text": "In this study, we focus on the Accuracy and other QA performance metrics; therefore, they are always dependent variables. These performance metrics are directly influenced by three variables: the ranking feature, passage quality, and answer quality, since ranking features can use passages and answers. Furthermore, passage quality depends on the information retrieval model (IR model) used and the passage depth (the number of passages used for answer extraction). The greater the passage depth, the worse the passage quality is likely to be, which could result in more answers of progressively lower quality.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Variable Dependencies",
"sec_num": "6.1"
},
{
"text": "When ASQA switches from a monolingual to cross-lingual task, two variables are triggered: translation and English question classification. When translation is active, a translation engine has to be chosen to translate the question. Bad translation quality has a chain reaction effect because it leads to bad query quality, which leads to bad passage quality and bad answer quality. In ASQA, answer extraction is based on named entity recognition (NER) and answer filtering is based on the compatibility of the question type and the answer type. Therefore, NER and question classification are two more variables that could influence answer quality. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Variable Dependencies",
"sec_num": "6.1"
},
{
"text": "We experimented on several QA datasets. A QA dataset is comprised of a set of questions, their answers, and the document IDs of supporting documents. The answers and supporting documents are regarded as the gold standard. We used the following six datasets from NTCIR5 and NTCIR6 for the CLQA Chinese-Chinese (CC) and English-Chinese (EC) subtasks: NTCIR5-CC-D200, NTCIR5-CC-T200, NTCIR5-EC-D200, NTCIR5-EC-T200, NTCIR6-CC-T150, and NTCIR6-EC-T150. The last item of a dataset name indicates the number of questions and the dataset's purpose, where T stands for \"test\" and D stands for \"development\". The CIRB40 corpus was used to compile the NTCIR5 CLQA datasets. It contains 901,446 Chinese newspaper news items published in 2000 and 2001. The corpus used for NTCIR6 CLQA was CIRB20, and it contains 249,508 Chinese newspaper news items published in 1998 and 1999.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "QA Datasets",
"sec_num": "6.2"
},
{
"text": "According to Lin ], datasets created by QA evaluation forums are not suitable for post-hoc evaluation because the gold standard is not sufficiently comprehensive. This means we have to manually check all the extra answers not covered by the gold standard in order to derive more reliable experiment results. Since the number of questions in our experiments is quite large, it is not feasible for us to examine all the extra answers and their supporting documents. Therefore, we only use RU-accuracy to compare performances so that we do not have to check all the returned documents; only the answers are checked. These manually examined answers are then fed back to the datasets to form six expanded datasets: NTCIR5-CC-D200e, NTCIR5-CC-T200e, NTCIR5-EC-D200e, NTCIR5-EC-T200e, NTCIR6-CC-T150e, and NTCIR6-EC-T150e. In addition, we created the IASL-CC-Q465 dataset to increase the degree of confidence in our experiments. It was developed by three people using a program that randomly selected passages from the CIRB40 corpus, searched for relevant documents, and created questions from the collected documents. Finally, we had 1015 questions for the C-C task and 550 questions for the E-C task.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "QA Datasets",
"sec_num": "6.2"
},
{
"text": "Answer correctness features are usually combined in order to achieve the best performance. However, combining features in QA relies mostly on heuristic methods. Although some systems use machine learning approaches successfully for QA ranking, it is rare to see the same approach being applied to other QA work. This may be because QA feature combination methods are not mature enough to deal with the variability of QA systems, and the amount of training data is not sufficient to train good models. Therefore, instead of combined features, we only studied the effect of single ranking features because we assume they are more reliable and can be easily applied to other systems or languages. Table 2 shows the experimental set-up. Along with SCO-QAT, we tested the following widely used shallow features: keyword overlap (KO), density, IR score (IR), mutual information score (MI), and answer frequency. The keyword overlap feature represents the ratio of question keywords found in a passage, as used in [Cooper and Ruger 2000; Molla and Gardiner 2005; Zhao et al. 2005] . The IR score [Kwok and Deng 2006; Zheng 2002] , which is provided by the passage retrieval module, is the score of the passage containing the answer. In ASQA2, the IR score is produced by the Lucene information retrieval engine 6 . Density is defined as the average distance between the answer and question keywords in a passage. There are several ways to calculate density. In this experiment, we simply adopt Lin's formula , which performed well in NTCIR-5 CLQA. The mutual information score is calculated by the PMI method used in [Magnini et al. 2001] , and instead of being based on the Web, it is calculated based on the whole corpus.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 1007,
"end": 1030,
"text": "[Cooper and Ruger 2000;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
},
{
"start": 1031,
"end": 1055,
"text": "Molla and Gardiner 2005;",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1056,
"end": 1073,
"text": "Zhao et al. 2005]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 1089,
"end": 1109,
"text": "[Kwok and Deng 2006;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 1110,
"end": 1121,
"text": "Zheng 2002]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF24"
},
{
"start": 1610,
"end": 1631,
"text": "[Magnini et al. 2001]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 694,
"end": 701,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": "TABREF5"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiment 1 -Single Shallow Features",
"sec_num": "6.3"
},
{
"text": "The experiment results are listed in Table 3 . SCO-QAT performs very well on C-C datasets, achieving 0.522 EAA for the NTCIR5-CC-D200e dataset, 0.515 for the NTCIR5-CC-T200e dataset, 0.546 for the IASL-CC-Q465 dataset, and 0.406 for the NTCIR6-CC-T150 dataset. Compared to other features, the differences are in the range 0.063~0.522 for EAA. 6 We adopted Lucene 2.0.0, which uses Vector Space Model as the default method to calculate the IR score of a document. Detail information can be found in the Lucene API documentation: Class Similarity:http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_0_0/api/org/apache/lucene/search/Similarity.htmlClass DefaultSimilarity: http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_0_0/api/org/apache/lucene/search/DefaultSimilarity.html In addition to comparing single ranking features, we compared the SCO-QAT results with those of other participants in the NTCIR5 CLQA task (Table 4) . As the other QA systems used combined features, this is a single-versus combined-feature comparison. In the NTCIR5 CLQA task [Sasaki et al. 2005] , there were thirteen Chinese QA runs with an accuracy range of 0.105~0.445, and a mean of 0.315. It is impressive that ASQA2 with the single SCO-QAT feature achieved 0.515 accuracy 7 , which was much better than the accuracy of ASQA1 [Lee et al. 2005] , the best performing system in the NTCIR5 CLQA C-C subtask. Although SCO-QAT still performs well on the E-C datasets, its performance is not as good as on the C-C datasets. After analyzing the failed cases of E-C QA, we found the major problem was that some translations introduced words not listed in the stop word list. For example, there were some English questions in NTCIR CLQA, such as \"Who is in charge of Indonesia's cabinet in 2000?\uff02After processing their Google translations, we identified improper keywords that were not on our stop word lists. For example, in the translation of the above question,\"\u7531\u8ab0\u8ca0\u8cac\u7684\u5370\u5c3c\u5167\u95a3\u65bc 2000 \uf98e?\uff02, we found\"\u7531\uff02and\"\u65bc\uff02. Since SCO-QAT aggregates all co-occurrence scores, the effect of improper keywords is compounded. Although this problem could be solved by simply adding more stop words to the list, it should be noted that more new stop words may be introduced if the machine translation engine is changed. A better solution is to use the term-by-term translation approach because the stop word list can be controlled more easily.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 343,
"end": 344,
"text": "6",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1014,
"end": 1034,
"text": "[Sasaki et al. 2005]",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1270,
"end": 1287,
"text": "[Lee et al. 2005]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 37,
"end": 44,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": "TABREF6"
},
{
"start": 877,
"end": 886,
"text": "(Table 4)",
"ref_id": "TABREF7"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiment 1 -Single Shallow Features",
"sec_num": "6.3"
},
{
"text": "Although frequency is the simplest of the shallow features, it performs surprisingly well. It even achieves the best performance on one E-C dataset (NTCIR5-EC-D200). This may be due to the effectiveness of the ASQA2 answer filtering module, the characteristics of the Chinese news corpus, or the way questions were created, which caused questions with high frequency answers to be selected. We cannot find any papers on the effect of applying the frequency feature only. Further investigation is, therefore, needed to explain the phenomenon.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiment 1 -Single Shallow Features",
"sec_num": "6.3"
},
{
"text": "The density feature measures the density of question terms around the answer based on the co-occurrence and distance information. Although it is widely used in QA systems, its performance is not as good as that of the IR score, which does not consider the distance information. This could be because the distance information is much noisier in QA that involves Chinese (e.g., E-C and C-C).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiment 1 -Single Shallow Features",
"sec_num": "6.3"
},
{
"text": "We identified two types of errors caused by machine translations: wrong-term errors and synonym errors. Both types have a negative effect on the ranking features because the quality of the passages is often poor. The following is an example of a wrong term error. For the English question\"Who is the director of the Chinese movie Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon?\uff02, the word\"director\uff02was translated by Google Translate to the wrong term\"\u65b0 \u4efb\uff02in\"\u8ab0\u662f\u65b0\u4efb\u7684\u4e2d\u570b\u96fb\u5f71\u81e5\u864e\u85cf\uf9c4?\uff02. Here, the semantics of\"director\uff02and\"\u65b0 \u4efb\uff02are completely different. In cases like this, it is impossible to find good quality passages for ranking. Synonym errors occur when improper synonyms are introduced. For example, the English question \"Who was Taiwan's Central Bank Governor with the longest tenure?\uff02is translated to\"\u8ab0\u662f\u53f0\u7063\u7684\u592e\ufa08\ufa08\u9577\u6700\u9577\u4efb\u671f?\uff02by Google. Although\"\ufa08\u9577\uff02is the correct translation for mainland China, it is not the normal way to describe the head of a bank in Taiwan; therefore, a query with \"\ufa08\u9577\" can not retrieve appropriate passages from Taiwanese news corpora (e.g., CIRB40 and CIRB20).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiment 1 -Single Shallow Features",
"sec_num": "6.3"
},
{
"text": "To develop a cross-lingual QA system, a monolingual system is usually created first and then some modules are adjusted to meet cross-lingual requirements. There are two widely used approaches: question translation and term-by-term translation. In the question translation approach, the question is translated into the target language by machine translation. The translated question is then input to the monolingual system. In the term-by-term approach, questions are analyzed in the source language and split into several important terms, which are then translated by using a bilingual dictionary or other techniques.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiment 2 -Influence of Machine Translation Quality",
"sec_num": "6.4"
},
{
"text": "Since ASQA2 adopts the question translation approach, we can control the translation quality intuitively using different machine translation engines. Noisy information introduced by a machine translation engine propagates down through the QA modules and results in wrong answers. We tested our system on two machine translation services (namely, Google",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiment 2 -Influence of Machine Translation Quality",
"sec_num": "6.4"
},
{
"text": "Translate and SYSTRAN 8 ) to determine how the translation quality affects the answer ranking features. Table 5 shows the experimental set-up. We observe that Google's translation quality is better than that of SYSTRAN. In other words, the accuracy declines when Google Translate is replaced by SYSTRAN. The performance decrease ratio (calculated as the performance of using SYSTRAN divided by that of using Google) for each of the three E-C datasets is shown in Table 6 . It seems to be difficult to predict the influence of the translation quality. If we only look at each dataset, the decrease ratio is quite unstable, ranging from 48.3% to 96.9% in terms of accuracy. However, when we consider the ratio based on all the datasets, it becomes more stable for all the ranking features. The standard deviation of the decrease in the accuracy ratio drops from more than 0.11 to 0.0655, which shows that the current datasets of NTCIR CLQA may be too small to be used with confidence in our experiments. Thus, it would be better to use all the EC datasets when comparing QA systems.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 104,
"end": 111,
"text": "Table 5",
"ref_id": "TABREF8"
},
{
"start": 463,
"end": 470,
"text": "Table 6",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Cross-Lingual and Monolingual Factoid Question Answering",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "For the EC-ALL dataset, SCO-QAT yields a better performance decrease ratio in terms of accuracy and EAA, but not in terms of MRR. The Frequency feature still performs relatively well, because the frequency of an answer is less dependant on the translation quality.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Cross-Lingual and Monolingual Factoid Question Answering",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Google is replaced by SYSTRAN.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Table 6. Performance decrease ratio of shallow features on E-C QA when",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "(a) NTCIR5-EC-D200 (b) NTCIR5-EC-T200 ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Table 6. Performance decrease ratio of shallow features on E-C QA when",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Passage depth, defined as the number of passages used for answer extraction and answer ranking, plays a critical role in a QA system. On the one hand, by increasing the passage depth we can obtain more relevant passages and, therefore, have a better chance of improving QA performance. On the other hand, increasing the passage depth also introduces more irrelevant passages. If a ranking feature can not handle the noise caused by deep passages, it can not benefit from additional relevant passages.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiment 3 -Influence of Passage Quality Introduced by Deep Passages",
"sec_num": "6.5"
},
{
"text": "In this experiment, we increase the number of passages to evaluate the performance of shallow features when the number of irrelevant passages increases. The experimental setup is shown in Table 7 . We observe the performance of all C-C and E-C datasets at five depth points between 100 and 500, as shown in Figure 4 . We chose 100 as the starting depth because it is commonly adopted in QA systems as the document depth or passage depth. As expected, for both CC and EC situations, EAA declines when the passage depth increases. (The IR score ranking feature is an exception. It always remains the same because the passage IR score of an answer does not change when the passage depth increases). However, the decrease in EAA is not as high as we expected, which suggests that, with the exception of frequency and MI, shallow ranking features can handle deep passage noise. 5 passage depth points (100, 200, 300, 400, 500) for all C-C and E-C datasets.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 188,
"end": 195,
"text": "Table 7",
"ref_id": "TABREF10"
},
{
"start": 307,
"end": 315,
"text": "Figure 4",
"ref_id": "FIGREF3"
},
{
"start": 873,
"end": 922,
"text": "5 passage depth points (100, 200, 300, 400, 500)",
"ref_id": "FIGREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiment 3 -Influence of Passage Quality Introduced by Deep Passages",
"sec_num": "6.5"
},
{
"text": "Among the ranking features, frequency and MI are influenced by passage depth the most. In EC, while frequency is the best at depth 100 in terms of EAA, the latter decreases rapidly when the passage depth increases to 200, which is much more unreliable than in the CC situation. In other words, the accuracy feature is much more unreliable in EC. For MI, it not only performed worse than the other features in terms of EAA, but also decreased substantially when the depth increased. This suggests that MI may not be suitable for retrieved passages, although it has been applied successfully when using the Web as a corpus.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiment 3 -Influence of Passage Quality Introduced by Deep Passages",
"sec_num": "6.5"
},
{
"text": "Some of the examples found confirm that the number of irrelevant passages increases when the number of passages increases. For example, when the number of passages is 100, the most frequent answer given to the Chinese question\"\u897f\u5143 2000 \uf98e\u52a0\u5165\u5967\u5730\uf9dd\uf997\u5408\u653f\u5e9c\u7684\u81ea \u7531\u9ee8\u9ee8\u9b41\u662f\u8ab0\uff1f\uff02(Who is the leader of Freedom Party joining the Austria coalition government in 2000?) is \"\u6d77\u5fb7\uff02(Haider), which is correct. However, when the number increases to 200, the most frequent answer is \"\u5c0f\u6fa4\u4e00\u90ce\uff02 (OZAWA Ichiro), which is incorrect. This causes density and the other shallow features to fail in this situation.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiment 3 -Influence of Passage Quality Introduced by Deep Passages",
"sec_num": "6.5"
},
{
"text": "As answer ranking is directly influenced by the answer quality, it is important to evaluate the ranking feature on answers of different quality. In this experiment, we adjusted the answer quality by changing the answer filter. The experimental set-up is detailed in Table 8 .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 266,
"end": 273,
"text": "Table 8",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiment 4 -Influence of Answer Quality",
"sec_num": "6.6"
},
{
"text": "Ranking Feature, Mono-or Cross-lingual",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Independent Variables",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Accuracy, MRR, EAA",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Dependent Variables",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The Expected Answer Type filter (EAT filter) is a submodule of ASQA2 that eliminates answers deemed incompatible with the question type. For example, if the question type is Q_LOCATION_COUNTRY, only answers representing countries will be retained. It is common for QA systems to use this kind of filtering mechanism, but they differ in the granularity of the answer type system they use. With a good EAT filter, the quality of the input for the subsequent Answer Ranking module will be less noisy and easier to deal with.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Controlled Variables Passage Depth, Translation Engine, Answer Filter",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "By utilizing the ASQA2 answer-type system (i.e., 6 coarse-grained and 62 fine-grained types), we can experiment with answer ranking features on different granularities. We built three EAT filters, namely, a DoNothing Filter, a Coarse-grained Filter 9 , and a Fine-grained Filter. The DoNothing Filter does not filter out any answers; therefore, it may contain a lot of noisy information. The Coarse-grained Filter and Fine-grained Filter use coarse-grained and fine-grained type information respectively.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Controlled Variables Passage Depth, Translation Engine, Answer Filter",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The Fine-grained Filter is used in the single feature experiment described in Section 6.3. Here, we conduct the same single feature experiment with the other two noisier EAT filters. The results are shown in Table 9 . As expected, the performance of every feature deteriorates with the noisy EAT filters. In the CC datasets, with the Coarse-grained Filter, SCO-QAT's EAA declines from 0.514 to 0.499 on the CC-ALL dataset, but it is still better than the other features. Even with the noisiest DoNothing Filter, SCO-QAT can still maintain a 71% decrease ratio for the CC-ALL dataset, thereby demonstrating its robustness. The calculation of decrease ratios in this section is similar to that in the \"Influence of Machine Translation Quality\" section. When speaking of Coarse-grained Filter, it is calculated as the performance of using Coarse-grained Filter divided by the performance of using Fine-grained Filter. When speaking of DoNothing Filter, the formula is the same except that the numerator is replaced with the performance of using DoNothing Filter.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 208,
"end": 215,
"text": "Table 9",
"ref_id": "TABREF13"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Controlled Variables Passage Depth, Translation Engine, Answer Filter",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Coarse-Grained (Decrease Ratio = Coarse-Grained / Fine-Grained) 9 also shows the performance decrease ratio caused by inefficient EAT filters. It is calculated by dividing the performance score of a noisy EAT filter by that of the standard Fine-grained Filter. From this perspective, SCO-QAT is still the best CC feature, achieving 97% and 71% EAA decrease ratio with the Coarse-Grained Filter and DoNothing EAT filter, respectively. The decline in some features is caused by too many answers being collocated in the same passage. Without a proper EAT filter, a passage could contain the correct answer and other answers; or, at worst, contain several answers, none of which are compatible with the given question. For example, the first returned passage for the Chinese question \"\u8acb\u554f\u897f\u5143 2000 \uf98e 7 \u6708\u7f8e\u65b9\u6d3e\u4f55\u4eba\u524d\u5f80\uf963\u4eac\u5c0d TMD \u4ee5\u53ca\u5176\u4ed6\u5168\u7403\u6230\uf976\u4f48\u5c40\u8207\u4e2d\u65b9\u5c55\u958b\u5c0d\u8a71\uff1f\" (Who is the delegate of United States visiting Beijing to negotiate the TMD issue in July, 2000?) does not ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Table 9(a). Performance and decrease ratio in CC QA when the Coarse-grained EAT filter is replaced by Fine-grained and DoNothing EAT filters.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Sometimes, the resources needed to apply deep answer ranking approaches in a language are not available or the resource quality is not good enough. Hence, we conducted this research to help QA system designers choose shallow ranking features. We experimented on six shallow ranking features (SCO-QAT, keyword overlap, density, IR score, mutual information score, and answer frequency) under various types of noise caused by different QA modules in mono-lingual and cross-lingual situations.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "7."
},
{
"text": "We also proposed a novel answer ranking feature called SCO-QAT, which does not require extra knowledge or sophisticated tools. It is, therefore, easy to implement in QA systems and may be used on various languages. In this pilot study, when the ASQA2 system only used the SCO-QAT ranking feature, it outperformed all the systems in NTCIR5 CLQA. For example, on the NTCIR5-CC-T200e QA dataset, we achieved 0.515 RU-Accuracy with the SCO-QAT feature only. Even the E-C version also achieved a 0.05 improvement over the best system. SCO-QAT also performed well in NTCIR6 CLQA, where the host system, ASQA2, achieved the best performance in the C-C subtask and the E-C subtask.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "7."
},
{
"text": "To understand SCO-QAT better and to gain a deeper insight into shallow answer ranking features, we tested answer ranking features in various scenarios. We found that, although SCO-QAT performed very well in C-C QA, frequency seems the best choice for ranking in E-C QA in terms of EAA. However, the decrease in translation quality has a marked effect on the frequency of EAA, as shown by the fact that the EAA decrease ratio is 69.3%. In the same situation, SCO-QAT maintained a 74.2% EAA decrease ratio which was the best among the shallow ranking features. We also found that the noise introduced by passage depth does not impact much on ranking performance. This suggests that, if a long processing time is allowed, QA based on deep passages is a possible way to improve the performance when shallow features are used. In addition, answer-type-based filtering plays an important role, especially for E-C. When an extremely bad filter was used, the EAA decrease ratio in E-C for shallow ranking features was only 2%~21%, which shows a proper answer filter with fined-grained NER is critical to the success of an E-C system.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "7."
},
{
"text": "In our future research on shallow ranking features, we will address the following issues. We will introduce a question term weighting scheme for SCO-QAT; use a taxonomy or ontology to alleviate the synonym problem that arises when counting co-occurrences of answers and question terms; experiment with shallow features on a Web corpus; utilize more syntactic information to make co-occurrence information more reliable; and test shallow features on other languages.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "7."
},
{
"text": "Academia Sinica, http://www.sinica.edu.tw 5 Lucene, http://lucene.apache.org/",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The 0.515 accuracy is based on NTCIR5-CC-T200e dataset. If based on the NTCIR5-CC-T200 dataset, the accuracy is 0.505",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We used the Yahoo! BABEL FISH service, which is powered by SYSTRAN. The translations were obtained fromGoogle and Yahoo in May 2007 and June 2007, respectively.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "This research was supported in part by the National Science Council of Taiwan under Center of Excellence Grant NSC 95-2752-E-001-001-PAE, the Research Center for Humanities and Social Sciences, Academia Sinica, and Thematic program of Academia Sinica under Grant AS 95ASIA02. We would like to thank the Chinese Knowledge and Information Processing Group (CKIP) in Academia Sinica for providing us with AutoTag for Chinese word segmentation.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acknowledgments",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Note that the decline in EC's performance is substantial when the DoNothing filter is applied. In the CC case, the decline in EAA for the SCO-QAT feature is 71%; however, in the EC case, it drops to 14%. This suggests that, in EC, information about the answer type is important, since it is more reliable than the shallow ranking features under noise introduced by translation. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "annex",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "Statistical Selection of Exact Answers (MultiText Experiments for TREC 2002)",
"authors": [
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [
"L A"
],
"last": "Clarke",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cormack",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kemkes",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Laszlo",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "T",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lynam",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [],
"last": "Terra",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "Tilker",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Proc. of TREC",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "823--831",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Clarke, C.L.A., G. Cormack, G. Kemkes, M. Laszlo, T. Lynam, E. Terra, and P. Tilker, \"Statistical Selection of Exact Answers (MultiText Experiments for TREC 2002),\" in Proc. of TREC, 2002, pp. 823-831.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "Exploiting redundancy in question answering",
"authors": [
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [
"L A"
],
"last": "Clarke",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [
"V"
],
"last": "Cormack",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "T",
"middle": [
"R"
],
"last": "Lynam",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 24th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "358--365",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Clarke, C.L.A., G.V. Cormack, and T.R. Lynam, \"Exploiting redundancy in question answering,\" in Proceedings of the 24th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, 2001, pp. 358-365.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "A Simple Question Answering System",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Cooper",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Ruger",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2000,
"venue": "Proc. of TREC",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Cooper, R.J. and S.M. Ruger, \"A Simple Question Answering System,\" in Proc. of TREC, 2000.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "Question answering passage retrieval using dependency relations",
"authors": [
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cui",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sun",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "K",
"middle": [],
"last": "Li",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [
"Y"
],
"last": "Kan",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "T",
"middle": [
"S"
],
"last": "Chua",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "400--407",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Cui, H., R. Sun, K. Li, M.Y. Kan, and T.S. Chua, \"Question answering passage retrieval using dependency relations,\" in Proceedings of the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, 2005, pp. 400-407.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "Learning Effective Surface Text Patterns for Information Extraction",
"authors": [
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Geleijnse",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Korst",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "Proceedings of the EACL 2006 workshop on Adaptive Text Extraction and Mining",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1--8",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Geleijnse, G. and J. Korst, \"Learning Effective Surface Text Patterns for Information Extraction,\" in Proceedings of the EACL 2006 workshop on Adaptive Text Extraction and Mining (ATEM 2006), 2006, pp. 1-8.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "The LIA at QA@CLEF-2006",
"authors": [
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Gillard",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sitbon",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [],
"last": "Blaudez",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bellot",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "El-B`eze",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "CLEF",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Gillard, L., L. Sitbon, E. Blaudez, P. Bellot, and M. El-B`eze, \"The LIA at QA@CLEF-2006,\" in CLEF, 2006.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "Employing Two Question Answering Systems in TREC 2005",
"authors": [
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Harabagiu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Moldovan",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [],
"last": "Clark",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bowden",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hickl",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wang",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Fourteenth Text REtrieval Conference",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Harabagiu, S., D. Moldovan, C. Clark, M. Bowden, A. Hickl, and P. Wang, \"Employing Two Question Answering Systems in TREC 2005,\" in Proceedings of the Fourteenth Text REtrieval Conference, 2005.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "Chinese Question-Answering:Comparing Monolingual with English-Chinese Cross-Lingual Results",
"authors": [
{
"first": "K.-L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kwok",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "Deng",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "Asia Information Retrieval Symposium",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "244--257",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kwok, K.-L. and P. Deng, P., \"Chinese Question-Answering:Comparing Monolingual with English-Chinese Cross-Lingual Results,\" in Asia Information Retrieval Symposium, 2006, pp. 244-257.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "Chinese-Chinese and English-Chinese Question Answering with ASQA at NTCIR-6 CLQA",
"authors": [
{
"first": "C.-W",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lee",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M.-Y",
"middle": [],
"last": "Day",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C.-L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sung",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Y.-H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lee",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "T-J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Jiang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C-W",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C-W",
"middle": [],
"last": "Shih",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Y-R.",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "W.-L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hsu",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2007,
"venue": "Proceedings of NTCIR-6 Workshop",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "175--181",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Lee, C.-W., M.-Y. Day, C.-L. Sung, Y.-H. Lee, T-J. Jiang, C-W. Wu, C-W. Shih, Y-R. Chen, .and W.-L. Hsu, \"Chinese-Chinese and English-Chinese Question Answering with ASQA at NTCIR-6 CLQA,\" in Proceedings of NTCIR-6 Workshop, 2007, pp. 175-181.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "ASQA: Academia Sinica Question Answering System for NTCIR-5 CLQA",
"authors": [
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [
"W"
],
"last": "Lee",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [
"W"
],
"last": "Shih",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [
"Y"
],
"last": "Day",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "T",
"middle": [
"H"
],
"last": "Tsai",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "T",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Jiang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [
"W"
],
"last": "Wu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Sung",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Y",
"middle": [
"R"
],
"last": "Chen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [
"H"
],
"last": "Wu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Hsu",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "Proceedings of NTCIR-5 Workshop Meeting",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Lee, C.W., C.W. Shih, M.Y. Day, T.H. Tsai, T.J. Jiang, C.W. Wu, C.L. Sung, Y.R. Chen, S.H. Wu, and W.L. Hsu, \"ASQA: Academia Sinica Question Answering System for NTCIR-5 CLQA,\" in Proceedings of NTCIR-5 Workshop Meeting , 2005, Tokyo, Japan.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "CMU JAVELIN System for NTCIR5 CLQA1",
"authors": [
{
"first": "F",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Shima",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "T",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mitamura",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 5th NTCIR Workshop",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Lin, F., H. Shima, M. Wang, and T. Mitamura, \"CMU JAVELIN System for NTCIR5 CLQA1,\" in Proceedings of the 5th NTCIR Workshop, 2005.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "Evaluation of resources for question answering evaluation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "392--399",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Lin, J., \"Evaluation of resources for question answering evaluation,\" in Proceedings of the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, pp. 392-399.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "Improving answer ranking using cohesion between answer and keywords",
"authors": [
{
"first": "S.-J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M.-S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Shia",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "K.-H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J.-H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Yu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "W.-H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lu",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "NTCIR Workshop",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Lin, S.-J., M.-S. Shia, K.-H. Lin, J.-H. Lin, S. Yu, and W.-H. Lu, \"Improving answer ranking using cohesion between answer and keywords,\" in NTCIR Workshop, 2005.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "Is it the right answer?: exploiting web redundancy for Answer Validation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "B",
"middle": [],
"last": "Magnini",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Negri",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Prevete",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Tanev",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "425--432",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Magnini, B., M. Negri, R. Prevete, and H. Tanev, \"Is it the right answer?: exploiting web redundancy for Answer Validation,\" in Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, 2001, pp. 425-432.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "AnswerFinder -Question Answering by Combining Lexical, Syntactic and Semantic Information",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Molla",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Gardiner",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Australasian Language Technology Workshop",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "9--16",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Molla, D. and M. Gardiner, M., \"AnswerFinder -Question Answering by Combining Lexical, Syntactic and Semantic Information,\" in Australasian Language Technology Workshop (ALTW) 2004, Sydney, Australia, pp. 9-16.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"title": "Learning Surface Text Patterns for a Question Answering System",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ravichandran",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hovy",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "41--47",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ravichandran, D. and E. Hovy, \"Learning Surface Text Patterns for a Question Answering System,\"in Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 41-47.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF16": {
"ref_id": "b16",
"title": "Experiments with Web QA System and TREC2004 Questions",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Roussinov",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Robles",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Y",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ding",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "the proceedings of TREC conference",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "16--19",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Roussinov, D., J. Robles, and Y. Ding, \"Experiments with Web QA System and TREC2004 Questions,\" in the proceedings of TREC conference, November, 2004, pp. 16-19.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF17": {
"ref_id": "b17",
"title": "DFKI-LT at the CLEF 2006 Multiple Language Question Answering Track",
"authors": [
{
"first": "B",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sacaleanu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Neumann",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "CLEF",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sacaleanu, B. and G. Neumann, \"DFKI-LT at the CLEF 2006 Multiple Language Question Answering Track,\" in CLEF, 2006.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF18": {
"ref_id": "b18",
"title": "Overview of the NTCIR-5 Cross-Lingual Question Answering Task (CLQA1)",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Y",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sasaki",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [
"H"
],
"last": "Chen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "K",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Fifth NTCIR Workshop Meeting",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "6--9",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sasaki, Y., H.H. Chen, K. Chen, and C.J. Lin, \"Overview of the NTCIR-5 Cross-Lingual Question Answering Task (CLQA1),\" in Proceedings of the Fifth NTCIR Workshop Meeting, pp. 6-9.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF19": {
"ref_id": "b19",
"title": "Overview of the NTCIR-6 Cross-Lingual Question Answering (CLQA) Task",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Y",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sasaki",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C.-J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "K-H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H.-H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chen",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2007,
"venue": "Proceedings of NTCIR-6 Workshop",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sasaki, Y., C.-J. Lin, K-H. Chen, and H.-H. Chen, \"Overview of the NTCIR-6 Cross-Lingual Question Answering (CLQA) Task,\" in Proceedings of NTCIR-6 Workshop, 2007, Tokyo, Japan.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF20": {
"ref_id": "b20",
"title": "Exploring Correlation of Dependency Relation Paths for Answer Extraction",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Shen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Saarbruecken",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Klakow",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "Proceedings of ACL 2006",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "889--896",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Shen, D., G. Saarbruecken, and D. Klakow, \"Exploring Correlation of Dependency Relation Paths for Answer Extraction,\" in Proceedings of ACL 2006, 2006, Sydney, Australia, pp. 889-896.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF21": {
"ref_id": "b21",
"title": "Patterns of Potential Answer Expressions as Clues to the Right Answers",
"authors": [
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Soubbotin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Soubbotin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Tenth Text REtrieval Conference",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "134--143",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Soubbotin, M.M. and S.M. Soubbotin, \"Patterns of Potential Answer Expressions as Clues to the Right Answers,\" in Proceedings of the Tenth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC 2001), 2001, Gaithersburg, MD, pp. 134-143.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF22": {
"ref_id": "b22",
"title": "Experiments with LSA for Passage Re-Ranking in Question Answering",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Tom\u00b4as",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [
"E L"
],
"last": "Vicedo",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bisbal",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Moreno",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "CLEF",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Tom\u00b4as, D., J.e.L. Vicedo, E. Bisbal, and L. Moreno, \"Experiments with LSA for Passage Re-Ranking in Question Answering,\" in CLEF, 2005.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF23": {
"ref_id": "b23",
"title": "Insun05QA on QA track of TREC2005",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Y",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zhao",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Z",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Xu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Y",
"middle": [],
"last": "Guan",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "Li",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "TREC",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Zhao, Y., Z.M. Xu, Y. Guan, and P. Li, \"Insun05QA on QA track of TREC2005,\" in TREC, 2005, Gaithersburg, MD.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF24": {
"ref_id": "b24",
"title": "AnswerBus Question Answering System",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Z",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zheng",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Proceeding of Human Language Technology Conference",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "24--27",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Zheng, Z., \"AnswerBus Question Answering System,\" in Proceeding of Human Language Technology Conference, 2002, San Diego, CA, pp. 24-27.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF2": {
"text": "Dependencies of experimental variables based on the architecture of ASQA 2. When a variable at the tail of an arrow changes, it would have influence on the variable at the arrow head.",
"uris": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"num": null
},
"FIGREF3": {
"text": "Single feature accuracy over",
"uris": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"num": null
},
"TABREF1": {
"num": null,
"html": null,
"text": "filtered by the Answer Filtering module according to the question type, answer type, and a mapping table that defines the types' compatibility. The final input for Answer Ranking is comprised of the question, the retrieved passages, and a set of filtered answers. Several answer ranking features are combined as a weighted sum. To deal with cross-lingual QA, ASQA2 adopts the question translation approach. Questions are translated with off-the-shelf machine translation engines.",
"content": "<table><tr><td>Chinese Question</td><td>English Question</td><td colspan=\"2\">Chinese Answers with supporting documents</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">Machine Translation</td><td/></tr><tr><td>Chinese Question Processing</td><td>English Question Processing</td><td colspan=\"2\">Answer Ranking</td></tr><tr><td>CQC CKeyword NER</td><td>EQC</td><td>SCO-QAT</td></tr><tr><td/><td/><td/><td>Answer Template</td></tr><tr><td>Passage Retrieval</td><td>Answer Extraction</td><td colspan=\"2\">Answer Filtering</td></tr><tr><td/><td/><td>EAT Filter</td><td>Answer Template</td></tr><tr><td/><td>NER</td><td/></tr><tr><td>passage index</td><td/><td/></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">Figure 1. System architecture of ASQA2 for Chinese-Chinese and</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">English-Chinese Factoid QA</td><td/></tr></table>",
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF4": {
"num": null,
"html": null,
"text": "",
"content": "<table><tr><td/><td>corpus</td><td colspan=\"2\">question amount creator</td><td>languages</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">NTCIR5-CC-D200 CIRB40</td><td>200</td><td>NTCIR</td><td>C-C</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">NTCIR5-CC-T200 CIRB40</td><td>200</td><td>NTCIR</td><td>C-C</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">NTCIR6-CC-T150 CIRB20</td><td>150</td><td>NTCIR</td><td>C-C</td></tr><tr><td>IASL-CC-Q465</td><td>CIRB40</td><td>465</td><td>Academia Sinica</td><td>C-C</td></tr><tr><td/><td/><td>1015</td><td/><td/></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">NTCIR5-EC-D200 CIRB40</td><td>200</td><td>NTCIR</td><td>E-C</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">NTCIR5-EC-T200 CIRB40</td><td>200</td><td>NTCIR</td><td>E-C</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">NTCIR6-EC-T150 CIRB20</td><td>150</td><td>NTCIR</td><td>E-C</td></tr></table>",
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF5": {
"num": null,
"html": null,
"text": "",
"content": "<table><tr><td>Independent Variables</td><td>Ranking Feature, Mono-or Cross-lingual</td></tr><tr><td>Dependent Variables</td><td>Accuracy, MRR, EAA</td></tr><tr><td>Controlled Variables</td><td>Passage Depth, Translation Engine, Answer Filter</td></tr></table>",
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF6": {
"num": null,
"html": null,
"text": "",
"content": "<table><tr><td>\"</td></tr></table>",
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF7": {
"num": null,
"html": null,
"text": "",
"content": "<table><tr><td colspan=\"3\">. Performance comparison of SCO-QAT (single feature) and the</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"3\">best systems at NTCIR5 and NTCIR6 CLQA (combined features)</td></tr><tr><td>Subtask</td><td>System</td><td>RU-Accuracy</td></tr><tr><td>NTCIR5 CC</td><td>Best Participant (ASQA1)</td><td>0.445</td></tr><tr><td/><td>ASQA2 with SCO-QAT only</td><td>0.515</td></tr><tr><td>NTCIR5 EC</td><td>Best Participant</td><td>0.165</td></tr><tr><td/><td>ASQA2 with SCO-QAT only</td><td>0.185</td></tr><tr><td>NTCIR6 CC</td><td>Best Participant (ASQA2 full version)</td><td>0.553</td></tr><tr><td/><td>ASQA2 with SCO-QAT only</td><td>0.413</td></tr><tr><td>NTCIR6 EC</td><td>Best Participant (ASQA2 full version)</td><td>0.340</td></tr><tr><td/><td>ASQA2 with SCO-QAT only</td><td>0.193</td></tr></table>",
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF8": {
"num": null,
"html": null,
"text": "",
"content": "<table><tr><td>Independent Variables</td><td>Ranking Feature, Translation Engine</td></tr><tr><td>Dependent Variables</td><td>Accuracy, MRR, EAA</td></tr><tr><td>Controlled Variables</td><td>Passage Depth, Mono-or Cross-lingual, Answer Filter</td></tr></table>",
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF10": {
"num": null,
"html": null,
"text": "",
"content": "<table><tr><td>Independent Variables</td><td>Ranking Feature, Passage Depth, Mono-or Cross-lingual</td></tr><tr><td>Dependent Variables</td><td>Accuracy, MRR, EAA</td></tr><tr><td>Controlled Variables</td><td>Translation Engine, Answer Filter</td></tr></table>",
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF12": {
"num": null,
"html": null,
"text": "",
"content": "<table/>",
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF13": {
"num": null,
"html": null,
"text": "",
"content": "<table/>",
"type_str": "table"
}
}
}
} |