Pith. sign in

REVIEW

R4C: A Benchmark for Evaluating RC Systems to Get the Right Answer for the Right Reason

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 1910.04601 v2 pith:6B5FIMUO submitted 2019-10-10 cs.CL

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

Recent studies have revealed that reading comprehension (RC) systems learn to exploit annotation artifacts and other biases in current datasets. This prevents the community from reliably measuring the progress of RC systems. To address this issue, we introduce R4C, a new task for evaluating RC systems' internal reasoning. R4C requires giving not only answers but also derivations: explanations that justify predicted answers. We present a reliable, crowdsourced framework for scalably annotating RC datasets with derivations. We create and publicly release the R4C dataset, the first, quality-assured dataset consisting of 4.6k questions, each of which is annotated with 3 reference derivations (i.e. 13.8k derivations). Experiments show that our automatic evaluation metrics using multiple reference derivations are reliable, and that R4C assesses different skills from an existing benchmark.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools