CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 427Topic ModelingNatural Language Processing TechniquesReading and Literacy Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

DROP: A Reading Comprehension Benchmark Requiring Discrete Reasoning Over Paragraphs

Open access
Dua, Dheeru, Wang, Yizhong, Dasigi, Pradeep, Stanovsky, Gabriel, Singh, Sameer, Gardner, Matt·2019·Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers)
DOI 10.18653/v1/n19-1246
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Dheeru Dua, Yizhong Wang, Pradeep Dasigi, Gabriel Stanovsky, Sameer Singh, Matt Gardner. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers). 2019.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18653/v1/n19-1246

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

  • BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding

    Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n19-1423 · Cited by 54,325 · cited 4×

    “For example, BERT, the current state-of-the-art on SQuAD, drops by more than 50 absolute F1 points.”
    MethodInfluential

  • Glove: Global Vectors for Word Representation

    Pennington, J., Socher, R., & Manning, C. (2014) · Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.3115/v1/d14-1162 · Cited by 34,071 · cited 2×

    “We also add context-specific rules to produce strings occurring in both question and paragraph, and those paragraph strings that are neighbors of question tokens in the GloVe embedding space (Pennington et al., 2014), up to a cosine distance of d .”
    Method

  • Deep Contextualized Word Representations

    Peters, M., Neumann, M., Iyyer, M., Gardner, M., Clark, C., Lee, K., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-1202 · Cited by 11,983 · cited 2×

    “We test four different SQuAD-style reading comprehension models on DROP: (1 (Peters et al., 2018) to the original embeddings (78.7% EM); (4) BERT (Devlin et al., 2018), which recently achieved improvements on many NLP tasks with a novel pre-training technique (84.7% EM).”
    MethodInfluentialSelf-citation

  • SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Text

    Rajpurkar, P., Zhang, J., Lopyrev, K., & Liang, P. (2016) · Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d16-1264 · Cited by 6,208 · cited 1×

    “Question answering datasets: With systems reaching human performance on the Stanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD) (Rajpurkar et al., 2016), many follow-on tasks are currently being proposed.”
    Method

  • A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inference

    Bowman, S. R., Angeli, G., Potts, C., & Manning, C. D. (2015) · Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d15-1075 · Cited by 3,377 · cited 3×

    “…et al., 2018; Kaushik and Lipton, 2018) has identified that popular synthetic NLP datasets (such as SQuAD (Ra-jpurkar et al., 2016) or SNLI (Bowman et al., 2015)) are prone to have artifacts and annotation biases which can be exploited by supervised algorithms that learn to pick up these…”
    BackgroundInfluential

  • Know What You Don’t Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuAD

    Rajpurkar, P., Jia, R., & Liang, P. (2018) · Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/p18-2124 · Cited by 2,240 · cited 2×

    “, 2018; Talmor and Berant, 2018), mismatched passages and questions (Saha et al., 2018; Kociský et al., 2018; Rajpurkar et al., 2018), integrating knowledge from external sources (Mihaylov et al.”
    Background

  • HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answering

    Yang, Z., Qi, P., Zhang, S., Bengio, Y., Cohen, W., Salakhutdinov, R., & Manning, C. D. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d18-1259 · Cited by 1,804 · cited 2×

    “…challenge, around tracking conversational state (Reddy et al., 2018; Choi et al., 2018), requiring passage retrieval (Joshi et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2018), mis-matched passages and questions (Saha et al., 2018; Kocisk´y et al., 2018; Rajpurkar et al., 2018), integrating knowledge from…”
    Background

  • Bidirectional Attention Flow for Machine ComprehensionPreprint

    Seo, M. J., Kembhavi, A., Farhadi, A., & Hajishirzi, H. (2016) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1611.01603 · Cited by 1,698 · cited 3×

    “…instructions given to workers, and partially through the use of an adversarial baseline : we ran a base-line reading comprehension method (BiDAF) (Seo et al., 2016) in the background as crowd workers were writing questions, requiring them to give questions that the baseline system could not…”
    MethodInfluential

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

    Joshi, M., Choi, E., Weld, D., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2017) · Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/p17-1147 · Cited by 1,690 · cited 2×

    “…to the reading comprehension challenge, around tracking conversational state (Reddy et al., 2018; Choi et al., 2018), requiring passage retrieval (Joshi et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2018), mis-matched passages and questions (Saha et al., 2018; Kocisk´y et al., 2018; Rajpurkar et al., 2018),…”
    Background

  • Can a Suit of Armor Conduct Electricity? A New Dataset for Open Book Question Answering

    Mihaylov, T., Clark, P. E., Khot, T., & Sabharwal, A. (2018) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/d18-1260 · Cited by 1,602 · cited 1×

    “, 2018), integrating knowledge from external sources (Mihaylov et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2019), tracking entity state changes (Mishra et al.”
    Background

  • Semantic Parsing on Freebase from Question-Answer Pairs

    Berant, J., Chou, A., Frostig, R., & Liang, P. (2013) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/d13-1160 · Cited by 1,593 · cited 2×

    “To train our model, we adopt the weakly supervised training method widely used in the semantic parsing literature (Berant et al., 2013a).”
    BackgroundMethod

  • Open information extraction from the web

    Banko, M., Cafarella, M., Soderland, S. G., Broadhead, M., & Etzioni, O. (2007) · Cited by 1,410

  • AllenNLP: A Deep Semantic Natural Language Processing Platform

    Gardner, M., Grus, J., Neumann, M., Tafjord, O., Dasigi, P., Liu, N. F., Peters, M. E., Schmitz, M., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2018) · Workshop for NLP Open Source Software (NLP-OSS) · doi:10.18653/v1/w18-2501 · Cited by 1,376 · cited 2×

    “We used the AllenNLP implementations of state-of-theart models for all of these representations (Gardner et al., 2017; Dozat et al., 2017; He et al., 2017; Stanovsky et al., 2018).”
    BackgroundMethodSelf-citation

  • CoQA: A Conversational Question Answering Challenge

    Reddy, S., Chen, D., & Manning, C. D. (2019) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00266 · Cited by 975 · cited 1×

    “All of these datasets throw in additional complexities to the reading comprehension challenge, around tracking conversational state (Reddy et al., 2019; Choi et al., 2018), requiring passage retrieval (Joshi et al.”
    Background

  • The Stanford typed dependencies representation

    de Marneffe, M.-C., & Manning, C. D. (2008) · doi:10.3115/1608858.1608859 · Cited by 936

  • Annotation Artifacts in Natural Language Inference Data

    Gururangan, S., Swayamdipta, S., Levy, O., Schwartz, R., Bowman, S., & Smith, N. A. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 2 (Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-2017 · Cited by 907 · cited 1×

    “A recent line of work (Gururangan et al., 2018; Kaushik and Lipton, 2018) has identified that popular synthetic NLP datasets (such as SQuAD (Ra-jpurkar et al., 2016) or SNLI (Bowman et al., 2015)) are prone to have artifacts and annotation biases which can be exploited by supervised algorithms that…”
    Background

  • Learning to Map Sentences to Logical Form: Structured Classification with Probabilistic Categorial GrammarsPreprint

    Zettlemoyer, L., & Collins, M. (2012) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1207.1420 · Cited by 815 · cited 2×

    “…(e.g., SQL) that can perform discrete operations against a structured knowledge representation, such as knowledge graphs or tabular databases (Zettlemoyer and Collins, 2005 Logical form language Our logical form language identifies five basic elements in the table representation:…”
    Background

  • SWAG: A Large-Scale Adversarial Dataset for Grounded Commonsense Inference

    Zellers, R., Bisk, Y., Schwartz, R., & Choi, Y. (2018) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/d18-1009 · Cited by 801 · cited 2×

    “a recent trend in creating datasets with adversarial baselines in the loop (Paperno et al., 2016; Minervini and Riedel, 2018; Zellers et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2019; Zellers et al., 2019).”
    Background

  • From Recognition to Cognition: Visual Commonsense Reasoning

    Zellers, R., Bisk, Y., Farhadi, A., & Choi, Y. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2019.00688 · Cited by 769 · cited 1×

    “a recent trend in creating datasets with adversarial baselines in the loop (Paperno et al., 2016; Minervini and Riedel, 2018; Zellers et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2019; Zellers et al., 2019).”
    Background

  • QuAC: Question Answering in Context

    Choi, E., He, H., Iyyer, M., Yatskar, M., Yih, W.-T., Choi, Y., Liang, P., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d18-1241 · Cited by 714 · cited 2×

    “All of these datasets throw in additional complexities to the reading comprehension challenge, around tracking conversational state (Reddy et al., 2019; Choi et al., 2018), requiring passage retrieval (Joshi et al.”
    Background

  • Introduction to the CoNLL-2005 shared task

    Carreras, X., & Màrquez, L. (2005) · Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning · doi:10.3115/1706543.1706571 · Cited by 646

  • Learning to parse database queries using inductive logic programming

    Zelle, J. M., & Mooney, R. J. (1996) · Cited by 642

  • A Syntactic Neural Model for General-Purpose Code Generation

    Yin, P., & Neubig, G. (2017) · Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/p17-1041 · Cited by 623

  • The NarrativeQA Reading Comprehension Challenge

    Kočiský, T., Schwarz, J., Blunsom, P., Dyer, C., Hermann, K. M., Melis, G., & Grefenstette, E. (2018) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00023 · Cited by 596

  • The Web as a Knowledge-Base for Answering Complex Questions

    Talmor, A., & Berant, J. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-1059 · Cited by 520 · cited 1×

    “, 2018), requiring passage retrieval (Joshi et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2018; Talmor and Berant, 2018), mismatched passages and questions (Saha et al.”
    Background

  • Compositional Semantic Parsing on Semi-Structured Tables

    Pasupat, P., & Liang, P. (2015) · Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.3115/v1/p15-1142 · Cited by 514 · cited 3×

    “It is this literature that we modeled our questions on, particularly looking at the questions in the Wik-iTableQuestions dataset (Pasupat and Liang, 2015).”
    BackgroundMethodInfluential

  • A Thorough Examination of the CNN/Daily Mail Reading Comprehension Task

    Chen, D., Bolton, J., & Manning, C. D. (2016) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/p16-1223 · Cited by 494 · cited 1×

    “…comprehension , where systems must understand a single passage of text well enough to answer arbitrary questions about it, has seen significant progress in the last few years, so much that the most popular datasets available for this task have been solved (Chen et al., 2016; De-vlin et al., 2018).”
    Background

  • QAngaroo (MedHop + WikiHop) - Constructing Datasets for Multi-hop Reading Comprehension Across Documents

    Welbl, J., Stenetorp, P., & Riedel, S. (2018) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00021 · Cited by 474 · cited 2×

    “…passages and questions (Saha et al., 2018; Kocisk´y et al., 2018; Rajpurkar et al., 2018), integrating knowledge from external sources (Mi-haylov et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2018), or a particular kind of “multi-step” reasoning over multiple documents (Welbl et al., 2018; Khashabi et al., 2018).”
    Background

  • Learning to Interpret Natural Language Navigation Instructions from Observations

    Chen, D. L., & Mooney, R. J. (2011) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v25i1.7974 · Cited by 439

  • Simple and Effective Multi-Paragraph Reading Comprehension

    Clark, C., & Gardner, M. (2018) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/p18-1078 · Cited by 434 · cited 1×

    “To address this, we adopted the marginal likelihood objective function proposed by Clark and Gardner (2018), which sums over the probabilities of all the matching spans.”
    MethodSelf-citation

  • Deep Semantic Role Labeling: What Works and What’s Next

    He, L., Lee, K., Lewis, M., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2017) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/p17-1044 · Cited by 432 · cited 1×

    “We used the AllenNLP implementations of state-of-theart models for all of these representations (Gardner et al., 2017; Dozat et al., 2017; He et al., 2017; Stanovsky et al., 2018).”
    Method

  • Neural Symbolic Machines: Learning Semantic Parsers on Freebase with Weak Supervision

    Chen, L., Berant, J., Le, Q. V., Forbus, K. D., & Lao, N. (2017) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/p17-1003 · Cited by 409 · cited 1×

    “Other re-lated work along these lines has been done by Reed and de Freitas (2015), Neelakantan et al. (2015), and Liang et al. (2017).”
    Background

  • Looking Beyond the Surface: A Challenge Set for Reading Comprehension over Multiple Sentences

    Khashabi, D., Chaturvedi, S., Roth, M., Upadhyay, S., & Roth, D. (2018) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-1023 · Cited by 407 · cited 2×

    “…passages and questions (Saha et al., 2018; Kocisk´y et al., 2018; Rajpurkar et al., 2018), integrating knowledge from external sources (Mi-haylov et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2018), or a particular kind of “multi-step” reasoning over multiple documents (Welbl et al., 2018; Khashabi et al., 2018).”
    Background

  • Learning to Automatically Solve Algebra Word Problems

    Kushman, N., Zettlemoyer, L., Barzilay, R., & Artzi, Y. (2014) · Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.3115/v1/p14-1026 · Cited by 400 · cited 1×

    “also contain similar phenomena to what is in DROP (Koncel-Kedziorski et al., 2015; Kushman et al., 2014; Hosseini et al., 2014; Clark et al., 2016; Ling et al., 2017).”
    Background

  • Neural Programmer-Interpreters

    Reed, S., & de Freitas, N. (2015) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1511.06279 · Cited by 347 · cited 1×

    “Other re-lated work along these lines has been done by Reed and de Freitas (2015), Neelakantan et al. (2015), and Liang et al. (2017).”
    Background

  • ReCoRD: Bridging the Gap between Human and Machine Commonsense Reading ComprehensionPreprint

    Zhang, S., Liu, X., Liu, J., Gao, J., Duh, K., & Durme, B. V. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1810.12885 · Cited by 339 · cited 2×

    “a recent trend in creating datasets with adversarial baselines in the loop (Paperno et al., 2016; Minervini and Riedel, 2018; Zellers et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2019; Zellers et al., 2019).”
    Background

  • Program Induction by Rationale Generation: Learning to Solve and Explain Algebraic Word Problems

    Ling, W., Yogatama, D., Dyer, C., & Blunsom, P. (2017) · Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/p17-1015 · Cited by 325 · cited 2×

    “Many existing algebra word problem datasets also contain similar phenomena to what is in DROP (Koncel-Kedziorski et al., 2015; Ling et al., 2017).”
    Background

  • Learning to Solve Arithmetic Word Problems with Verb Categorization

    Hosseini, M. J., Hajishirzi, H., Etzioni, O., & Kushman, N. (2014) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.3115/v1/d14-1058 · Cited by 324 · cited 1×

    “also contain similar phenomena to what is in DROP (Koncel-Kedziorski et al., 2015; Kushman et al., 2014; Hosseini et al., 2014; Clark et al., 2016; Ling et al., 2017).”
    Background

  • Supervised Open Information Extraction

    Stanovsky, G., Michael, J., Zettlemoyer, L., & Dagan, I. (2018) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-1081 · Cited by 289 · cited 1×

    “We used the AllenNLP implementations of state-of-theart models for all of these representations (Gardner et al., 2017; Dozat et al., 2017; He et al., 2017; Stanovsky et al., 2018).”
    MethodSelf-citation

  • How Much Reading Does Reading Comprehension Require? A Critical Investigation of Popular Benchmarks

    Kaushik, D., & Lipton, Z. C. (2018) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/d18-1546 · Cited by 252 · cited 1×

    “A recent line of work (Gururangan et al., 2018; Kaushik and Lipton, 2018) has identified that popular synthetic NLP datasets (such as SQuAD (Ra-jpurkar et al., 2016) or SNLI (Bowman et al., 2015)) are prone to have artifacts and annotation biases which can be exploited by supervised algorithms that…”
    Background

  • Parsing Algebraic Word Problems into Equations

    Koncel-Kedziorski, R., Hajishirzi, H., Sabharwal, A., Etzioni, O., & Ang, S. D. (2015) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00160 · Cited by 242 · cited 2×

    “Many existing algebra word problem datasets also contain similar phenomena to what is in DROP (Koncel-Kedziorski et al., 2015; Ling et al., 2017).”
    Background

  • Neural Semantic Parsing with Type Constraints for Semi-Structured Tables

    Krishnamurthy, J., Dasigi, P., & Gardner, M. (2017) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/d17-1160 · Cited by 231 · cited 2×

    “4 Following, each worker answered their own question with one of three answer types: spans of text from either question or passage, a date (which was common in history and open-domain text) and numbers, allowed only for questions which explicitly stated a specific unit of measurement (e.g., “How many yards did Brady ru…”
    MethodSelf-citation

  • Stanford's Graph-based Neural Dependency Parser at the CoNLL 2017 Shared Task

    Dozat, T., Qi, P., & Manning, C. D. (2017) · CoNLL Shared Task: Multilingual Parsing from Raw Text to Universal Dependencies · doi:10.18653/v1/k17-3002 · Cited by 219 · cited 1×

    “We used the AllenNLP implementations of state-of-theart models for all of these representations (Gardner et al., 2017; Dozat et al., 2017; He et al., 2017; Stanovsky et al., 2018).”
    Method

  • emrQA: A Large Corpus for Question Answering on Electronic Medical Records

    Pampari, A., Raghavan, P., Liang, J., & Peng, J. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d18-1258 · Cited by 191 · cited 1×

    “Similar facets are explored in medical domain datasets (Pampari et al., 2018; Šuster and Daelemans, 2018) which contain automatically generated queries on medical records based on predefined templates.”
    Background

  • Combining Retrieval, Statistics, and Inference to Answer Elementary Science Questions

    Clark, P. E., Etzioni, O., Khot, T., Sabharwal, A., Tafjord, O., Turney, P. D., & Khashabi, D. (2016) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v30i1.10325 · Cited by 139 · cited 1×

    “also contain similar phenomena to what is in DROP (Koncel-Kedziorski et al., 2015; Kushman et al., 2014; Hosseini et al., 2014; Clark et al., 2016; Ling et al., 2017).”
    Background

  • DuoRC: Towards Complex Language Understanding with Paraphrased Reading Comprehension

    Saha, A., Aralikatte, R., Khapra, M. M., & Sankaranarayanan, K. (2018) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/p18-1156 · Cited by 125 · cited 2×

    “, 2018; Talmor and Berant, 2018), mismatched passages and questions (Saha et al., 2018; Kociský et al., 2018; Rajpurkar et al., 2018), integrating knowledge from external sources (Mihaylov et al.”
    Background

  • MCScript: A Novel Dataset for Assessing Machine Comprehension Using Script Knowledge

    Ostermann, S., Modi, A., Roth, M., Thater, S., & Pinkal, M. (2018) · Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC) · doi:10.63317/2x36g84ob95p · Cited by 101 · cited 1×

    “, 2019), tracking entity state changes (Mishra et al., 2018; Ostermann et al., 2018) or a particular kind of “multi-step” reasoning over multiple documents (Welbl et al.”
    Background

  • The LAMBADA dataset: Word prediction requiring a broad discourse context

    Paperno, D., Kruszewski, G., Lazaridou, A., Pham, N. Q., Bernardi, R., Pezzelle, S., Baroni, M., Boleda, G., & Fernandez, R. (2016) · Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/p16-1144 · Cited by 87

  • Adversarially Regularising Neural

    Minervini, P., & Riedel, S. (2018) · Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning · doi:10.18653/v1/k18-1007 · Cited by 85 · cited 1×

    “Adversarial dataset construction: We continue a recent trend in creating datasets with adversarial baselines in the loop (Paperno et al., 2016; Minervini and Riedel, 2018; Zellers et al., 2018b; Zhang et al., 2018; Zellers et al., 2018a).”
    Background

  • CliCR: a Dataset of Clinical Case Reports for Machine Reading Comprehension

    Šuster, S., & Daelemans, W. M. P. (2018) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-1140 · Cited by 35

  • Tracking State Changes in Procedural Text: A Challenge Dataset and Models for Process Paragraph ComprehensionPreprint

    Mishra, B. D., Huang, L., Tandon, N., Yih, W.-T., & Clark, P. E. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1805.06975 · Cited by 18 · cited 1×

    “, 2019), tracking entity state changes (Mishra et al., 2018; Ostermann et al., 2018) or a particular kind of “multi-step” reasoning over multiple documents (Welbl et al.”
    Background

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • The Power of Scale for Parameter-Efficient Prompt Tuning

    Lester, B., Al-Rfou, R., & Constant, N. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.08691 · Cited by 3,092

    “Of the datasets where model tuning is better, we see that DROP shares a domain (Wikipedia) with SQuAD and is thus one of the smallest domain transfers.”
    Background

  • The Power of Scale for Parameter-Efficient Prompt Tuning

    Lester, B., Al-Rfou, R., & Constant, N. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.243 · Cited by 3,096

    “Of the datasets where model tuning is better, we see that DROP shares a domain (Wikipedia) with SQuAD and is thus one of the smallest domain transfers.”
    Background

  • PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways

    Chowdhery, A., Narang, S., Devlin, J., Bosma, M., Mishra, G., Roberts, A., Barham, P., Chung, H. W., Sutton, C., Gehrmann, S., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2204.02311 · Cited by 2,590

    “…Common Sense Reasoning: PIQA (Bisk et al., 2019), ARC (Clark et al., 2018), OpenBookQA (Mihaylov et al., 2018) • In-context Reading Comprehension: DROP (Dua et al., 2019), CoQA (Reddy et al., 2018), QuAC (Choi et al., 2018), SQuADv2 (Rajpurkar et al., 2018), RACE (Lai et al., 2017) •…”
    Background

  • Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learners

    Wei, J., Bosma, M., Zhao, V. Y., Guu, K., Yu, A. W., Lester, B., Du, N., Dai, A. M., & Le, Q. V. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.01652 · Cited by 1,101

    “0 -20 20 40 60 Percent of Data Clean in Dataset Percent change in performance of FLAN (accuracy, F1, or BLEU) eval on only clean data did better eval on all data (including dirty) did better ANLI R2 SQuAD v2 ANLI R1 DROP ReCoRD PIQA 25 500 75 100 Figure 9: Like GPT-3, we also measured performance on cleaned versions o…”
    BackgroundInfluential

  • Climbing towards NLU: On Meaning, Form, and Understanding in the Age of Data

    Bender, E. M., & Koller, A. (2020) · Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.463 · Cited by 1,082

    “For example, the DROP reading comprehension benchmark (Dua et al., 2019) seeks to create more stringent tests of understanding by creating questions that require the system to integrate information from different parts of a paragraph via simple arithmetic or similar operations.”
    Background

See all 427

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Dua, D., Wang, Y., Dasigi, P., Stanovsky, G., Singh, S., & Gardner, M.
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers)
Publisher
Association for Computational Linguistics
Published
2019
Pages
2368-2378
DOI
10.18653/v1/n19-1246
OpenAlex
W2919420119
Cited by
393
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 60 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 113 · 2020: 78 · 2019: 32
FWCI
27.26
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
reading comprehension, benchmark, question answering

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review