Conversations with Documents. An Exploration of Document-Centered Assistance

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2002.00747v1
• Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 17:10:11 GMT
• Title: Conversations with Documents. An Exploration of Document-Centered Assistance
• Authors: Maartje ter Hoeve, Robert Sim, Elnaz Nouri, Adam Fourney, Maarten de Rijke, Ryen W. White
• Abstract summary: Document-centered assistance, for example, to help an individual quickly review a document, has seen less significant progress. We present a survey to understand the space of document-centered assistance and the capabilities people expect in this scenario. We present a set of initial machine learned models that show that (a) we can accurately detect document-centered questions, and (b) we can build reasonably accurate models for answering such questions.
• Score: 55.60379539074692
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The role of conversational assistants has become more prevalent in helping people increase their productivity. Document-centered assistance, for example to help an individual quickly review a document, has seen less significant progress, even though it has the potential to tremendously increase a user's productivity. This type of document-centered assistance is the focus of this paper. Our contributions are three-fold: (1) We first present a survey to understand the space of document-centered assistance and the capabilities people expect in this scenario. (2) We investigate the types of queries that users will pose while seeking assistance with documents, and show that document-centered questions form the majority of these queries. (3) We present a set of initial machine learned models that show that (a) we can accurately detect document-centered questions, and (b) we can build reasonably accurate models for answering such questions. These positive results are encouraging, and suggest that even greater results may be attained with continued study of this interesting and novel problem space. Our findings have implications for the design of intelligent systems to support task completion via natural interactions with documents.

Related papers

• Follow-Up Questions Improve Documents Generated by Large Language Models [0.0]
  This study investigates the impact of Large Language Models (LLMs) generating follow-up questions in response to user requests for short (1-page) text documents. Users interacted with a novel web-based AI system designed to ask follow-up questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-27T07:16:46Z)
• ResearchArena: Benchmarking LLMs' Ability to Collect and Organize Information as Research Agents [21.17856299966841]
  Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited remarkable performance across various tasks in natural language processing. We develop ResearchArena, a benchmark that measures LLM agents' ability to conduct academic surveys.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T03:26:30Z)
• Beyond Relevance: Evaluate and Improve Retrievers on Perspective Awareness [56.42192735214931]
  retrievers are expected to not only rely on the semantic relevance between the documents and the queries but also recognize the nuanced intents or perspectives behind a user query. In this work, we study whether retrievers can recognize and respond to different perspectives of the queries. We show that current retrievers have limited awareness of subtly different perspectives in queries and can also be biased toward certain perspectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-04T17:10:00Z)
• Improving Health Question Answering with Reliable and Time-Aware Evidence Retrieval [5.69361786082969]
  Our study focuses on the open-domain QA setting, where the key challenge is to first uncover relevant evidence in large knowledge bases. By utilizing the common retrieve-then-read QA pipeline and PubMed as a trustworthy collection of medical research documents, we answer health questions from three diverse datasets. Our results reveal that cutting down on the amount of retrieved documents and favoring more recent and highly cited documents can improve the final macro F1 score up to 10%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-12T09:56:12Z)
• SurveyAgent: A Conversational System for Personalized and Efficient Research Survey [50.04283471107001]
  This paper introduces SurveyAgent, a novel conversational system designed to provide personalized and efficient research survey assistance to researchers. SurveyAgent integrates three key modules: Knowledge Management for organizing papers, Recommendation for discovering relevant literature, and Query Answering for engaging with content on a deeper level. Our evaluation demonstrates SurveyAgent's effectiveness in streamlining research activities, showcasing its capability to facilitate how researchers interact with scientific literature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-09T15:01:51Z)
• Layout-Aware Information Extraction for Document-Grounded Dialogue: Dataset, Method and Demonstration [75.47708732473586]
  We propose a layout-aware document-level Information Extraction dataset, LIE, to facilitate the study of extracting both structural and semantic knowledge from visually rich documents. LIE contains 62k annotations of three extraction tasks from 4,061 pages in product and official documents. Empirical results show that layout is critical for VRD-based extraction, and system demonstration also verifies that the extracted knowledge can help locate the answers that users care about.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-14T07:59:45Z)
• A Dataset of Information-Seeking Questions and Answers Anchored in Research Papers [66.11048565324468]
  We present a dataset of 5,049 questions over 1,585 Natural Language Processing papers. Each question is written by an NLP practitioner who read only the title and abstract of the corresponding paper, and the question seeks information present in the full text. We find that existing models that do well on other QA tasks do not perform well on answering these questions, underperforming humans by at least 27 F1 points when answering them from entire papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-07T00:12:34Z)
• Characterizing Stage-Aware Writing Assistance in Collaborative Document Authoring [14.512030721220437]
  We present three studies that explore temporal stages of document authoring. We conclude that writers do in fact conceptually progress through several distinct phases while authoring documents. As a first step towards facilitating an intelligent digital writing assistant, we conduct a preliminary investigation into the utility of user interaction log data for predicting the temporal stage of a document.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-18T21:48:04Z)
• Explaining Relationships Between Scientific Documents [55.23390424044378]
  We address the task of explaining relationships between two scientific documents using natural language text. In this paper we establish a dataset of 622K examples from 154K documents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-02T03:54:47Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.