Open-Retrieval Conversational Question Answering

Conversational search is one of the ultimate goals of information retrieval. Recent research approaches conversational search by simplified settings of response ranking and conversational question answering, where an answer is either selected from a given candidate set or extracted from a given passage. These simplifications neglect the fundamental role of retrieval in conversational search. To address this limitation, we introduce an open-retrieval conversational question answering (ORConvQA) setting, where we learn to retrieve evidence from a large collection before extracting answers, as a further step towards building functional conversational search systems. We create a dataset, OR-QuAC, to facilitate research on ORConvQA. We build an end-to-end system for ORConvQA, featuring a retriever, a reranker, and a reader that are all based on Transformers. Our extensive experiments on OR-QuAC demonstrate that a learnable retriever is crucial for ORConvQA. We further show that our system can make a substantial improvement when we enable history modeling in all system components. Moreover, we show that the reranker component contributes to the model performance by providing a regularization effect. Finally, further in-depth analyses are performed to provide new insights into ORConvQA.Comment: Accepted to SIGIR'2

Modelling information needs in collaborative search conversations

The increase of voice-based interaction has changed the way people seek information, making search more conversational. Development of effective conversational approaches to search requires better understanding of how people express information needs in dialogue. This paper describes the creation and examination of over 32K spoken utterances collected during 34 hours of collaborative search tasks. The contribution of this work is three-fold. First, we propose a model of conversational information needs (CINs) based on a synthesis of relevant theories in Information Seeking and Retrieval. Second, we show several behavioural patterns of CINs based on the proposed model. Third, we identify effective feature groups that may be useful for detecting CINs categories from conversations. This paper concludes with a discussion of how these findings can facilitate advance of conversational search applications

CC-News-En: A Large English News Corpus

We describe a static, open-access news corpus using data from the Common Crawl Foundation, who provide free, publicly available web archives, including a continuous crawl of international news articles published in multiple languages. Our derived corpus, CC-News-En, contains 44 million English documents collected between September 2016 and March 2018. The collection is comparable in size with the number of documents typically found in a single shard of a large-scale, distributed search engine, and is four times larger than the news collections previously used in offline information retrieval experiments. To complement the corpus, 173 topics were curated using titles from Reddit threads, forming a temporally representative sampling of relevant news topics over the 583 day collection window. Information needs were then generated using automatic summarization tools to produce textual and audio representations, and used to elicit query variations from crowdworkers, with a total of 10,437 queries collected against the 173 topics. Of these, 10,089 include key-stroke level instrumentation that captures the timings of character insertions and deletions made by the workers while typing their queries. These new resources support a wide variety of experiments, including large-scale efficiency exercises and query auto-completion synthesis, with scope for future addition of relevance judgments to support offline effectiveness experiments and hence batch evaluation campaigns

Characterizing Belief Bias in Syllogistic Reasoning: A Hierarchical Bayesian Meta-Analysis of ROC Data

The belief-bias effect is one of the most-studied biases in reasoning. A recent study of the phenomenon using the signal detection theory (SDT) model called into question all theoretical accounts of belief bias by demonstrating that belief-based differences in the ability to discriminate between valid and invalid syllogisms may be an artifact stemming from the use of inappropriate linear measurement models such as analysis of variance (Dube et al., Psychological Review, 117(3), 831–863, 2010). The discrepancy between Dube et al.’s, Psychological Review, 117(3), 831–863 (2010) results and the previous three decades of work, together with former’s methodological criticisms suggests the need to revisit earlier results, this time collecting confidence-rating responses. Using a hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis, we reanalyzed a corpus of 22 confidence-rating studies (N = 993). The results indicated that extensive replications using confidence-rating data are unnecessary as the observed receiver operating characteristic functions are not systematically asymmetric. These results were subsequently corroborated by a novel experimental design based on SDT’s generalized area theorem. Although the meta-analysis confirms that believability does not influence discriminability unconditionally, it also confirmed previous results that factors such as individual differences mediate the effect. The main point is that data from previous and future studies can be safely analyzed using appropriate hierarchical methods that do not require confidence ratings. More generally, our results set a new standard for analyzing data and evaluating theories in reasoning. Important methodological and theoretical considerations for future work on belief bias and related domains are discussed