Differentiating Choices via Commonality for Multiple-Choice Question Answering

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.11554v1
• Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 12:05:21 GMT
• Title: Differentiating Choices via Commonality for Multiple-Choice Question Answering
• Authors: Wenqing Deng, Zhe Wang, Kewen Wang, Shirui Pan, Xiaowang Zhang, Zhiyong Feng,
• Abstract summary: Multiple-choice question answering can provide valuable clues for choosing the right answer. Existing models often rank each choice separately, overlooking the context provided by other choices. We propose a novel model by differentiating choices through identifying and eliminating their commonality, called DCQA.
• Score: 54.04315943420376
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Multiple-choice question answering (MCQA) becomes particularly challenging when all choices are relevant to the question and are semantically similar. Yet this setting of MCQA can potentially provide valuable clues for choosing the right answer. Existing models often rank each choice separately, overlooking the context provided by other choices. Specifically, they fail to leverage the semantic commonalities and nuances among the choices for reasoning. In this paper, we propose a novel MCQA model by differentiating choices through identifying and eliminating their commonality, called DCQA. Our model captures token-level attention of each choice to the question, and separates tokens of the question attended to by all the choices (i.e., commonalities) from those by individual choices (i.e., nuances). Using the nuances as refined contexts for the choices, our model can effectively differentiate choices with subtle differences and provide justifications for choosing the correct answer. We conduct comprehensive experiments across five commonly used MCQA benchmarks, demonstrating that DCQA consistently outperforms baseline models. Furthermore, our case study illustrates the effectiveness of the approach in directing the attention of the model to more differentiating features.

Related papers

• Answer, Assemble, Ace: Understanding How Transformers Answer Multiple Choice Questions [103.20281438405111]
  Multiple-choice question answering (MCQA) is a key competence of performant transformer language models. We employ vocabulary projection and activation patching methods to localize key hidden states that encode relevant information. We show that prediction of a specific answer symbol is causally attributed to a single middle layer, and specifically its multi-head self-attention mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-21T00:10:23Z)
• Transfer Learning Enhanced Single-choice Decision for Multi-choice Question Answering [27.601353412882258]
  Multi-choice Machine Reading (MMRC) aims to select the correct answer from a set of options based on a given passage and question. In this paper, we reconstruct multi-choice to single-choice by training a binary classification to distinguish whether a certain answer is correct. Our proposed method gets rid of the multi-choice framework and can leverage resources of other tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-27T16:02:55Z)
• Large Language Models Are Not Robust Multiple Choice Selectors [117.72712117510953]
  Multiple choice questions (MCQs) serve as a common yet important task format in the evaluation of large language models (LLMs) This work shows that modern LLMs are vulnerable to option position changes due to their inherent "selection bias" We propose a label-free, inference-time debiasing method, called PriDe, which separates the model's prior bias for option IDs from the overall prediction distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-07T17:44:56Z)
• Getting MoRE out of Mixture of Language Model Reasoning Experts [71.61176122960464]
  We propose a Mixture-of-Reasoning-Experts (MoRE) framework that ensembles diverse specialized language models. We specialize the backbone language model with prompts optimized for different reasoning categories, including factual, multihop, mathematical, and commonsense reasoning. Our human study confirms that presenting expert predictions and the answer selection process helps annotators more accurately calibrate when to trust the system's output.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T02:00:51Z)
• Leveraging Large Language Models for Multiple Choice Question Answering [6.198523595657983]
  We show that a model with high MCSB ability performs much better with the natural approach than with the traditional approach. We show that a model with high MCSB ability performs much better with the natural approach than with the traditional approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-22T05:04:54Z)
• Generative Context Pair Selection for Multi-hop Question Answering [60.74354009152721]
  We propose a generative context selection model for multi-hop question answering. Our proposed generative passage selection model has a better performance (4.9% higher than baseline) on adversarial held-out set.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-18T07:00:48Z)
• Improving Machine Reading Comprehension with Single-choice Decision and Transfer Learning [18.81256990043713]
  Multi-choice Machine Reading (MMRC) aims to select the correct answer from a set of options based on a given passage and question. It is non-trivial to transfer knowledge from other MRC tasks such as SQuAD, Dream. We reconstruct multi-choice to single-choice by training a binary classification to distinguish whether a certain answer is correct.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-06T11:33:29Z)
• MS-Ranker: Accumulating Evidence from Potentially Correct Candidates for Answer Selection [59.95429407899612]
  We propose a novel reinforcement learning based multi-step ranking model, named MS-Ranker. We explicitly consider the potential correctness of candidates and update the evidence with a gating mechanism. Our model significantly outperforms existing methods that do not rely on external resources.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-10T10:36:58Z)

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.