REVIEW 9 cited by
TAPAS: Weakly Supervised Table Parsing via Pre-training
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Answering natural language questions over tables is usually seen as a semantic parsing task. To alleviate the collection cost of full logical forms, one popular approach focuses on weak supervision consisting of denotations instead of logical forms. However, training semantic parsers from weak supervision poses difficulties, and in addition, the generated logical forms are only used as an intermediate step prior to retrieving the denotation. In this paper, we present TAPAS, an approach to question answering over tables without generating logical forms. TAPAS trains from weak supervision, and predicts the denotation by selecting table cells and optionally applying a corresponding aggregation operator to such selection. TAPAS extends BERT's architecture to encode tables as input, initializes from an effective joint pre-training of text segments and tables crawled from Wikipedia, and is trained end-to-end. We experiment with three different semantic parsing datasets, and find that TAPAS outperforms or rivals semantic parsing models by improving state-of-the-art accuracy on SQA from 55.1 to 67.2 and performing on par with the state-of-the-art on WIKISQL and WIKITQ, but with a simpler model architecture. We additionally find that transfer learning, which is trivial in our setting, from WIKISQL to WIKITQ, yields 48.7 accuracy, 4.2 points above the state-of-the-art.
Forward citations
Cited by 9 Pith papers
-
TEN: Table Explicitization, Neurosymbolically
A neurosymbolic system with structural decomposition prompting and a checker-driven self-debug loop improves table extraction from semistructured text over purely neural baselines.
-
TableMind: An Autonomous Programmatic Agent for Tool-Augmented Table Reasoning
TableMind, a two-stage SFT-plus-RL agent trained on an 8B model, reports state-of-the-art results on three table reasoning benchmarks.
-
ExpliCIT-QA: Explainable Code-Based Image Table Question Answering
ExpliCIT-QA turns table-image question answering into a traceable sequence of table extraction, natural-language reasoning, code generation, execution, and explanation.
-
Multimodal Tabular Reasoning with Privileged Structured Information
An 8B multimodal LLM trained on 9k reasoning traces distilled from structured tables reaches state-of-the-art open-source accuracy on table-image question answering and fact verification.
-
Ta-G-T: Subjectivity Capture in Table to Text Generation via RDF Graphs
A modular T5-based pipeline using RDF triples, sentence aggregation, and style transfer generates factual text with subjective interpretations from tables, achieving moderate gains over several LLM baselines.
-
Advancing Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Structured Enterprise and Internal Data
An enterprise RAG framework combining hybrid retrieval, cross-encoder reranking, and structure-aware table indexing claims relative gains of 15% in Precision@5, 13% in Recall@5, and 16% in MRR over a dense-only baseline.
-
Interactive Text-to-SQL via Expected Information Gain for Disambiguation
An interactive text-to-SQL framework selects clarification questions by expected information gain over a distribution of candidate SQL queries.
-
OpenTable-R1: A Reinforcement Learning Augmented Tool Agent for Open-Domain Table Question Answering
A 4B-parameter model fine-tuned with supervised cold-start and an asynchronous GRPO reinforcement learning variant reaches 86.2% exact match on a held-out subset of Open WikiTable by using search and SQL tools.
-
LLM-Assisted Question-Answering on Technical Documents Using Structured Data-Aware Retrieval Augmented Generation
A RAG pipeline with OCR, table and image to text conversion, and a RAFT-tuned reranker reports high QA scores, but its 50-question evaluation overlaps with its training manuals and its baseline comparison uses only 5 ...
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.