pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 1906.02900 · v1 · submitted 2019-06-07 · 💻 cs.CL · cs.AI

Recognition: unknown

Compositional Questions Do Not Necessitate Multi-hop Reasoning

Authors on Pith no claims yet
classification 💻 cs.CL cs.AI
keywords multi-hopreasoningquestionsanalysisanswercompositionalevenevidence
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Multi-hop reading comprehension (RC) questions are challenging because they require reading and reasoning over multiple paragraphs. We argue that it can be difficult to construct large multi-hop RC datasets. For example, even highly compositional questions can be answered with a single hop if they target specific entity types, or the facts needed to answer them are redundant. Our analysis is centered on HotpotQA, where we show that single-hop reasoning can solve much more of the dataset than previously thought. We introduce a single-hop BERT-based RC model that achieves 67 F1---comparable to state-of-the-art multi-hop models. We also design an evaluation setting where humans are not shown all of the necessary paragraphs for the intended multi-hop reasoning but can still answer over 80% of questions. Together with detailed error analysis, these results suggest there should be an increasing focus on the role of evidence in multi-hop reasoning and possibly even a shift towards information retrieval style evaluations with large and diverse evidence collections.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

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