Cited by 44Topic ModelingNatural Language Processing TechniquesSpeech and dialogue systems

Teaching Machines to Ask Questions

Open access
Yao, Kaichun, Zhang, Libo, Luo, Tiejian, Tao, Lili, Wu, Yanjun·2018·Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

We propose a novel neural network model that aims to generate diverse and human-like natural language questions. Our model not only directly captures the variability in possible questions by using a latent variable, but also generates certain types of questions by introducing an additional observed variable. We deploy our model in the generative adversarial network (GAN) framework and modify the discriminator which not only allows evaluating the question authenticity, but predicts the question type. Our model is trained and evaluated on a question-answering dataset SQuAD, and the experimental results shown the proposed model is able to generate diverse and readable questions with the specific attribute.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.24963/ijcai.2018/632

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 29 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [Chali and Hasan, 2015] Yllias Chali and Sadid A. Hasan. Towards topic-to-question generation. Computational Linguistics , 41(1):1-20, 2015.
  2. [Colby et al. , 1971] Kenneth Mark Colby, Sylvia Weber, and Franklin Dennis Hilf. Artificial paranoia. Artif. Intell. , 2(1):1-25, 1971.
  3. [Hochreiter and Schmidhuber, 1997] Sepp Hochreiter and Jurgen Schmidhuber. Long short-term memory. Neural Computation , 9(8):1735-1780, 1997.
  4. [Sohn et al. , 2015] Kihyuk Sohn, Honglak Lee, and Xinchen Yan. Learning structured output representation using deep conditional generative models. In NIPS , 2015.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yao, K., Zhang, L., Luo, T., Tao, L., & Wu, Y.
Affiliations
  • Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
  • University of the West of England (GB)
Venue
Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Published
2018-07
Pages
4546-4552
OpenAlex
W2807750936
Cited by
44
References
29
Citations by year
2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8
FWCI
3.25
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • UWE Research Repository (UWE Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
Keywords
question generation, latent variable models, generative adversarial networks, SQuAD, question answering dataset

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