Classifier combination approach for question classification for Bengali question answering system

[EN] Question classification (QC) is a prime constituent of an automated question answering system. The work presented here demonstrates that a combination of multiple models achieves better classification performance than those obtained with existing individual models for the QC task in Bengali. We have exploited state-of-the-art multiple model combination techniques, i.e., ensemble, stacking and voting, to increase QC accuracy. Lexical, syntactic and semantic features of Bengali questions are used for four well-known classifiers, namely Naive Bayes, kernel Naive Bayes, Rule Induction and Decision Tree, which serve as our base learners. Single-layer question-class taxonomy with 8 coarse-grained classes is extended to two-layer taxonomy by adding 69 fine-grained classes. We carried out the experiments both on single-layer and two-layer taxonomies. Experimental results confirmed that classifier combination approaches outperform single-classifier classification approaches by 4.02% for coarse-grained question classes. Overall, the stacking approach produces the best results for fine-grained classification and achieves 87.79% of accuracy. The approach presented here could be used in other Indo-Aryan or Indic languages to develop a question answering system.Somnath Banerjee and Sudip Kumar Naskar are supported by Digital India Corporation (formerly Media Lab Asia), MeitY, Government of India, under the Visvesvaraya Ph.D. Scheme for Electronics and IT. The work of Paolo Rosso was partially funded by the Spanish MICINN under the research project PGC2018-096212-B-C31.Banerjee, S.; Kumar Naskar, S.; Rosso, P.; Bndyopadhyay, S. (2019). Classifier combination approach for question classification for Bengali question answering system. Sadhana. 44(12):1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-019-1224-81144412Jurafsky D and Martin J H 2014 Speech and language processing. Pearson, LondonMartin J H and Jurafsky D 2000 Speech and language processing, international edition 710Voorhees E M 2002 Overview of the TREC 2001 question answering track. NIST Special Publication, pp. 42–51Hovy E, Gerber L, Hermjakob U, Lin C Y and Ravichandran D 2001 Toward semantics-based answer pinpointing. In: Proceedings of Human Language Technology Research, ACL, pp. 1–7Ittycheriah A, Franz M, Zhu W J, Ratnaparkhi A and Mammone R J 2000 IBM’s statistical question answering system. In: Proceedings of TRECMoldovan D, Paşca M, Harabagiu S and Surdeanu M 2003 Performance issues and error analysis in an open-domain question answering system. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 21(2): 133–154Banerjee S and Bandyopadhyay S 2012 Bengali question classification: towards developing QA system. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on South and Sotheast Asian Language Processing (SANLP), COLING, pp. 25–40Loni B 2011 A survey of state-of-the-art methods on question classification. Technical Report, Delft University of TechnologyHull D A 1999 Xerox TREC-8 question answering track report. In: Proceedings of TRECPrager J, Radev D, Brown E, Coden A and Samn V 1999 The use of predictive annotation for question answering in TREC8. Inf. Retr. 1(3): 4Moschitti A, Quarteroni S, Basili R and Manandhar S 2007 Exploiting syntactic and shallow semantic kernels for question answer classification. In: Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, p. 776Zhang D and Lee W S 2003 Question classification using support vector machines. In: Proceedings of Research and Development in Informaion Retrieval, ACM, pp. 26–32Huang Z, Thint M and Qin Z 2008 Question classification using head words and their hypernyms. In: Proceedings of Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, ACL, pp. 927–936Silva J, Coheur L, Mendes A C and Wichert A 2011 From symbolic to sub-symbolic information in question classification. Artif. Intell. Rev. 35(2): 137–154Li X and Roth D 2006 Learning question classifiers: the role of semantic information. Nat. Lang. Eng. 12(03): 229–249McCallum A, Freitag D and Pereira F C N 2000 Maximum entropy markov models for information extraction and segmentation. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), vol. 17, pp. 591–598Cortes C and Vapnik V 1995 Support-vector networks. Mach. Learn. 20(3): 273–297Breiman L 1996 Bagging predictors. Mach. Learn. 24(2): 123–140Clemen R T 1989 Combining forecasts: a review and annotated bibliography. Int. J. Forecast. 5(4): 559–583Perrone M P 1993 Improving regression estimation: averaging methods for variance reduction with extensions to general convex measure optimization. Ph.D. Thesis, Brown UniversityWolpert D H 1992 Stacked generalization. Neural Netw. 5(2): 241–259Hansen L K and Salamon P 1990 Neural network ensembles. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 12: 993–1001Krogh A, Vedelsby J et al 1995 Neural network ensembles, cross validation, and active learning. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 7: 231–238Hashem S 1997 Optimal linear combinations of neural networks. Neural Netw. 10(4): 599–614Opitz D W and Shavlik J W 1996 Actively searching for an effective neural network ensemble. Connect. Sci. 8(3–4): 337–354Opitz D W and Shavlik J W 1996 Generating accurate and diverse members of a neural-network ensemble. In: Advances in neural information processing systems, pp. 535–541Xin L, Huang X J and Wu L 2006 Question classification by ensemble learning. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Netw. Secur. 6(3): 147Schapire R E 1990 The strength of weak learnability. Mach. Learn. 5(2): 197–227Brill E 1995 Transformation-based error-driven learning and natural language processing: a case study in part-of-speech tagging. Comput. Linguist. 21(4): 543–565Jia K, Chen K, Fan X and Zhang Y 2007 Chinese question classification based on ensemble learning. In: Proceedings of ACIS International Conference on Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking, and Parallel/Distributed Computing, SNPD 2007. IEEE, vol. 3, pp. 342–347Su L, Liao H, Yu Z and Zhao Q 2009 Ensemble learning for question classification. In: Proceedings of Intelligent Computing and Intelligent Systems, ICIS. IEEE, pp. 501–505Ferrucci D, Brown E, Chu-Carroll J, Fan J et al 2010 Building Watson: an overview of the DeepQA project. AI Mag. 31(3): 59–79Pérez-Coutiño M A, Montes-y-Gómez M, López-López A and Villaseñor-Pineda L 2005 Experiments for tuning the values of lexical features in question answering for Spanish. In: CLEF Working NotesNeumann G and Sacaleanu B 2003 A cross-language question/answering system for German and English. In: Proceedings of the Workshop of the Cross-Language Evaluation Forum for European Languages, pp. 559–571Blunsom P, Kocik K and Curran J R 2006 Question classification with log-linear models. In: Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. ACM, pp. 615–616Rosso P, Benajiba Y and Lyhyaoui A 2006 In: Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Scientific Research Outlook and Technology Development in the Arab World, pp. 11–14Abouenour L, Bouzoubaa K and Rosso P 2012 IDRAAQ: new Arabic question answering system based on query expansion and passage retrieval. In: Proceedings of CELCTSakai T, Saito Y, Ichimura Y, Koyama M, Kokubu T and Manabe T 2004 ASKMi: a Japanese question answering system based on semantic role analysis. In: Proceedings of Coupling Approaches, Coupling Media and Coupling Languages for Information Retrieval, pp. 215–231Isozaki H, Sudoh K and Tsukada H 2005 NTT’s Japanese–English cross-language question answering system. In: Proceedings of NTCIRYongkui Z, Zheqian Z, Lijun B and Xinqing C 2003 Internet-based Chinese question-answering system. Comput. Eng. 15: 34Sun A, Jiang M, He Y, Chen L and Yuan B 2008 Chinese question answering based on syntax analysis and answer classification. Acta Electron. Sin. 36(5): 833–839Sahu S, Vasnik N and Roy D 2012 Prashnottar: a Hindi question answering system. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Inf. Technol. 4(2): 149Nanda G, Dua M and Singla K 2016 A Hindi question answering system using machine learning approach. In: Proceedings of Computational Techniques in Information and Communication Technologies (ICCTICT). IEEE, pp. 311–314Sekine S and Grishman R 2003 Hindi–English cross-lingual question-answering system. ACM Trans. Asian Lang. Inf. Process. 2(3): 181–192Shukla P, Mukherjee A and Raina A 2004 Towards a language independent encoding of documents. In: Proceedings of NLUCS 2004, p. 116Ray S K, Ahmad A and Shaalan K 2018 A review of the state of the art in Hindi question answering systems. In: Proceedings of Intelligent Natural Language Processing: Trends and Applications, pp. 265–292Kumar P, Kashyap S, Mittal A and Gupta S 2003 A query answering system for e-learning Hindi documents. South Asian Lang. Rev. 13(1–2): 69–81Reddy R, Reddy N and Bandyopadhyay S 2006 Dialogue based question answering system in Telugu. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Multilingual Question Answering, pp. 53–60Dhanjal G S, Sharma S and Sarao P K 2016 Gravity based Punjabi question answering system. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 147(3): 30–35Bindu M S and Mary I S 2012 Design and development of a named entity based question answering system for Malayalam language. Ph.D. Thesis, Cochin University of Science and TechnologyLee C W et al 2005 ASQA: academia sinica question answering system for NTCIR-5 CLQA. In: Proceedings of the NTCIR-5 Workshop, pp. 202–208Banerjee S and Bandyopadhyay S 2013 Ensemble approach for fine-grained question classification in Bengali. In: Proceedings of the 27th Pacific–Asia Conference on Language, Information, and Computation (PACLIC-27), pp. 75–84Loni B, Van Tulder G, Wiggers P, Tax D M J and Loog M 2011 Question classification by weighted combination of lexical, syntactic and semantic features. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Text, Speech, and Dialogue, pp. 243–250Huang Z, Thint M and Celikyilmaz A 2009 Investigation of question classifier in question answering. In: Proceedings of Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. ACL, vol. 2, pp. 543–550Blunsom P, Kocik K and Curran J R 2006 Question classification with log-linear models. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. ACM, pp. 615–616Diwakar S, Goyal P and Gupta R 2010 Transliteration among indian languages using WX notation. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Natural Language Processing, EPFL-CONF-168805. Saarland University Press, pp. 147–150Banerjee S, Naskar S K and Bandyopadhyay S Bengali named entity recognition using margin infused relaxed algorithm. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Text, Speech, and Dialogue, pp. 125–132Li X and Roth D Learning question classifiers. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, ACL, vol. 1, pp. 1–7Cohen J 1960 A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 20(1): 37–46Schapire R E 1990 The strength of weak learnability. Mach. Learn. 5(2): 197–22

Detecting missing content queries in an SMS-Based HIV/AIDS FAQ retrieval system

Automated Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) answering systems use pre-stored sets of question-answer pairs as an information source to answer natural language questions posed by the users. The main problem with this kind of information source is that there is no guarantee that there will be a relevant question-answer pair for all user queries. In this paper, we propose to deploy a binary classifier in an existing SMS-Based HIV/AIDS FAQ retrieval system to detect user queries that do not have the relevant question-answer pair in the FAQ document collection. Before deploying such a classifier, we first evaluate different feature sets for training in order to determine the sets of features that can build a model that yields the best classification accuracy. We carry out our evaluation using seven different feature sets generated from a query log before and after retrieval by the FAQ retrieval system. Our results suggest that, combining different feature sets markedly improves the classification accuracy

A Diagram Is Worth A Dozen Images

Diagrams are common tools for representing complex concepts, relationships and events, often when it would be difficult to portray the same information with natural images. Understanding natural images has been extensively studied in computer vision, while diagram understanding has received little attention. In this paper, we study the problem of diagram interpretation and reasoning, the challenging task of identifying the structure of a diagram and the semantics of its constituents and their relationships. We introduce Diagram Parse Graphs (DPG) as our representation to model the structure of diagrams. We define syntactic parsing of diagrams as learning to infer DPGs for diagrams and study semantic interpretation and reasoning of diagrams in the context of diagram question answering. We devise an LSTM-based method for syntactic parsing of diagrams and introduce a DPG-based attention model for diagram question answering. We compile a new dataset of diagrams with exhaustive annotations of constituents and relationships for over 5,000 diagrams and 15,000 questions and answers. Our results show the significance of our models for syntactic parsing and question answering in diagrams using DPGs

Visual Question Answering: A Survey of Methods and Datasets

Visual Question Answering (VQA) is a challenging task that has received increasing attention from both the computer vision and the natural language processing communities. Given an image and a question in natural language, it requires reasoning over visual elements of the image and general knowledge to infer the correct answer. In the first part of this survey, we examine the state of the art by comparing modern approaches to the problem. We classify methods by their mechanism to connect the visual and textual modalities. In particular, we examine the common approach of combining convolutional and recurrent neural networks to map images and questions to a common feature space. We also discuss memory-augmented and modular architectures that interface with structured knowledge bases. In the second part of this survey, we review the datasets available for training and evaluating VQA systems. The various datatsets contain questions at different levels of complexity, which require different capabilities and types of reasoning. We examine in depth the question/answer pairs from the Visual Genome project, and evaluate the relevance of the structured annotations of images with scene graphs for VQA. Finally, we discuss promising future directions for the field, in particular the connection to structured knowledge bases and the use of natural language processing models.Comment: 25 page