Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Exploring Rewriting Approaches for Different Conversational Tasks

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 2502.18860 v2 pith:F7NUMQ2D submitted 2025-02-26 cs.CL

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

Conversational assistants often require a question rewriting algorithm that leverages a subset of past interactions to provide a more meaningful (accurate) answer to the user's question or request. However, the exact rewriting approach may often depend on the use case and application-specific tasks supported by the conversational assistant, among other constraints. In this paper, we systematically investigate two different approaches, denoted as rewriting and fusion, on two fundamentally different generation tasks, including a text-to-text generation task and a multimodal generative task that takes as input text and generates a visualization or data table that answers the user's question. Our results indicate that the specific rewriting or fusion approach highly depends on the underlying use case and generative task. In particular, we find that for a conversational question-answering assistant, the query rewriting approach performs best, whereas for a data analysis assistant that generates visualizations and data tables based on the user's conversation with the assistant, the fusion approach works best. Notably, we explore two datasets for the data analysis assistant use case, for short and long conversations, and we find that query fusion always performs better, whereas for the conversational text-based question-answering, the query rewrite approach performs best.

Discussion (0). Sign in 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. Enhancing Scientific Visual Question Answering through Multimodal Reasoning and Ensemble Modeling

    cs.CV 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    On the SciVQA 2025 benchmark, an InternVL3 model with optimized prompts and chain-of-thought instructions reaches ROUGE-1 and ROUGE-L F1 of 0.740, and a figure-type-aware ensemble ranks 5th.

Pith tools