Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

WIQA: A dataset for "What if..." reasoning over procedural text

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1909.04739 v1 pith:YX2OD57D submitted 2019-09-10 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords paragraphquestionswiqadataseterosionperturbationswhatbeach
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We introduce WIQA, the first large-scale dataset of "What if..." questions over procedural text. WIQA contains three parts: a collection of paragraphs each describing a process, e.g., beach erosion; a set of crowdsourced influence graphs for each paragraph, describing how one change affects another; and a large (40k) collection of "What if...?" multiple-choice questions derived from the graphs. For example, given a paragraph about beach erosion, would stormy weather result in more or less erosion (or have no effect)? The task is to answer the questions, given their associated paragraph. WIQA contains three kinds of questions: perturbations to steps mentioned in the paragraph; external (out-of-paragraph) perturbations requiring commonsense knowledge; and irrelevant (no effect) perturbations. We find that state-of-the-art models achieve 73.8% accuracy, well below the human performance of 96.3%. We analyze the challenges, in particular tracking chains of influences, and present the dataset as an open challenge to the community.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. FABLE: A Novel Data-Flow Analysis Benchmark on Procedural Text for Large Language Model Evaluation

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new benchmark adapts eight classic program data-flow analyses into natural-language questions and finds that only a reasoning-focused LLM clearly beats random guessing.

Pith tools