REVIEW 2 cited by
"I'd rather just go to bed": Understanding Indirect Answers
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
We revisit a pragmatic inference problem in dialog: understanding indirect responses to questions. Humans can interpret 'I'm starving.' in response to 'Hungry?', even without direct cue words such as 'yes' and 'no'. In dialog systems, allowing natural responses rather than closed vocabularies would be similarly beneficial. However, today's systems are only as sensitive to these pragmatic moves as their language model allows. We create and release the first large-scale English language corpus 'Circa' with 34,268 (polar question, indirect answer) pairs to enable progress on this task. The data was collected via elaborate crowdsourcing, and contains utterances with yes/no meaning, as well as uncertain, middle-ground, and conditional responses. We also present BERT-based neural models to predict such categories for a question-answer pair. We find that while transfer learning from entailment works reasonably, performance is not yet sufficient for robust dialog. Our models reach 82-88% accuracy for a 4-class distinction, and 74-85% for 6 classes.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
The Common Pile v0.1: An 8TB Dataset of Public Domain and Openly Licensed Text
A new 8TB openly-licensed text corpus trains 7B LLMs that are competitive with Llama 1/2, showing that performant models need not depend on unlicensed web data.
-
Entailed Between the Lines: Incorporating Implication into NLI
The paper formalizes implied entailment as a four-way NLI label, builds the INLI dataset from existing implicature sources, and shows fine-tuned models can label implied vs explicit entailment and generalize across co...
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.