REVIEW 2 cited by
Enhancing textual textbook question answering with large language models and retrieval augmented generation
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
read the original abstract
Textbook question answering (TQA) is a challenging task in artificial intelligence due to the complex nature of context needed to answer complex questions. Although previous research has improved the task, there are still some limitations in textual TQA, including weak reasoning and inability to capture contextual information in the lengthy context. We propose a framework (PLRTQA) that incorporates the retrieval augmented generation (RAG) technique to handle the out-of-domain scenario where concepts are spread across different lessons, and utilize transfer learning to handle the long context and enhance reasoning abilities. Our architecture outperforms the baseline, achieving an accuracy improvement of 4. 12% in the validation set and 9. 84% in the test set for textual multiple-choice questions. While this paper focuses on solving challenges in the textual TQA, It provides a foundation for future work in multimodal TQA where the visual components are integrated to address more complex educational scenarios. Code: https://github.com/hessaAlawwad/PLR-TQA
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Improving Multi-Step Reasoning Abilities of Large Language Models with Direct Advantage Policy Optimization
DAPO trains a step-level value critic and regresses the policy log-ratio to the critic-derived advantage, improving LLM math and code reasoning over the base model on several benchmarks.
-
Political Events using RAG with LLMs
A RAG plus Llama 2 pipeline is proposed for extracting political event properties from news headlines, with a reported 0.87 accuracy on 50 curated events and no public artifacts.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.