Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
80 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
59 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
7 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehension (1705.03551v2)

Published 9 May 2017 in cs.CL

Abstract: We present TriviaQA, a challenging reading comprehension dataset containing over 650K question-answer-evidence triples. TriviaQA includes 95K question-answer pairs authored by trivia enthusiasts and independently gathered evidence documents, six per question on average, that provide high quality distant supervision for answering the questions. We show that, in comparison to other recently introduced large-scale datasets, TriviaQA (1) has relatively complex, compositional questions, (2) has considerable syntactic and lexical variability between questions and corresponding answer-evidence sentences, and (3) requires more cross sentence reasoning to find answers. We also present two baseline algorithms: a feature-based classifier and a state-of-the-art neural network, that performs well on SQuAD reading comprehension. Neither approach comes close to human performance (23% and 40% vs. 80%), suggesting that TriviaQA is a challenging testbed that is worth significant future study. Data and code available at -- http://nlp.cs.washington.edu/triviaqa/

Summarizing "TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehension"

The paper "TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehension" introduces TriviaQA, a new reading comprehension dataset developed to address multiple challenges in natural language understanding. The dataset consists of over 650,000 question-answer-evidence triples, including 95,000 question-answer pairs crafted by trivia enthusiasts and augmented by six evidence documents per question, on average.

The dataset is designed to meet several objectives that set it apart from existing datasets. Firstly, TriviaQA features relatively complex, compositional questions that require a depth of understanding not typically necessitated by simpler question formats. Secondly, it exhibits significant syntactic and lexical varieties between questions and answer-providing sentences, thus demanding advanced language processing capabilities. Lastly, a notable portion of TriviaQA necessitates cross-sentence reasoning, enhancing its value for testing more sophisticated reasoning models.

Moreover, two baseline algorithms—a feature-based classifier and a state-of-the-art neural network—were tested on the dataset to evaluate its difficulty. Despite these advanced methods, neither algorithm approached human performance, achieving only 23% and 40% accuracy compared to human-level performance of 80%.

Dataset Assembly and Verification

The creation of TriviaQA involved a meticulous process of collecting high-quality question-answer pairs from 14 trivia websites, filtering and preprocessing them, then supplementing them with evidence documents sourced from both Wikipedia and a general web search. Tagging entities using tools like TAGME allowed the extraction of relevant Wikipedia pages, significantly contributing to the informational diversity within the dataset.

A crucial aspect of TriviaQA is the decoupling of question generation from evidence collection, which mitigates biases commonly found in other large-scale datasets. This approach allowed the dataset to reflect a broader range of naturally occurring queries, which better simulates practical applications.

A comprehensive manual analysis of 1975 question-documents-answer triples further highlighted TriviaQA’s robustness. Verification indicated that provided documents contain sufficient information to answer nearly 80% of the questions correctly, supporting its validity as a dataset for training and evaluating reading comprehension models.

Baseline Models and Performance Evaluation

The paper thoroughly details the performance of several baseline models on TriviaQA:

  • Random Entity Baseline: This heuristic method was particularly weak, demonstrating the complexity of TriviaQA by achieving only 12-15% accuracy.
  • Entity Classifier: Inspired by established work on QA systems, this approach provides a systematic method but also falls short, with performance between 23-27%.
  • Neural Network (BiDAF): Despite being a state-of-the-art model for QA, BiDAF achieved only around 40% accuracy on TriviaQA, underscoring the dataset's demanding nature.

In particular, the BiDAF model’s performance was notably lower on longer, more complex questions and those requiring multi-sentence reasoning, highlighting current limitations in dealing with highly compositional language and extensive contexts.

Implications and Future Directions

The introduction of TriviaQA represents a significant contribution to the reading comprehension and QA fields by simultaneously pushing the boundaries of model development and evaluation. Its challenging nature exemplified by syntactic variability, widespread lexical differences, and necessity for multi-sentence reasoning, establishes a new standard for dataset complexity. This complexity ensures that progress on TriviaQA will directly translate to real-world applications where questions are naturally complex and evidence is not neatly packaged.

Future research can leverage TriviaQA not only for reading comprehension but across interconnected domains such as open-domain QA, KB question answering, and hybrid approaches combining structured and unstructured data. Additionally, refined models that can effectively parse and semantically integrate large, noisy text corpora are expected. When further developed, such models will benefit a broad range of applications, from information retrieval to advanced AI dialogue systems.

Ultimately, the authors of the paper provide a compelling case for the need for more challenging datasets, and TriviaQA stands as a critical tool in the ongoing endeavor to advance the state of natural language understanding.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (4)
  1. Mandar Joshi (24 papers)
  2. Eunsol Choi (76 papers)
  3. Daniel S. Weld (54 papers)
  4. Luke Zettlemoyer (225 papers)
Citations (2,149)
Youtube Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com