Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

AIT-QA: Question Answering Dataset over Complex Tables in the Airline Industry

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

arxiv 2106.12944 v1 pith:GC7WXGA3 submitted 2021-06-24 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords tabletablesdatasetlayoutairlinecomplexdomain-specificquestions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recent advances in transformers have enabled Table Question Answering (Table QA) systems to achieve high accuracy and SOTA results on open domain datasets like WikiTableQuestions and WikiSQL. Such transformers are frequently pre-trained on open-domain content such as Wikipedia, where they effectively encode questions and corresponding tables from Wikipedia as seen in Table QA dataset. However, web tables in Wikipedia are notably flat in their layout, with the first row as the sole column header. The layout lends to a relational view of tables where each row is a tuple. Whereas, tables in domain-specific business or scientific documents often have a much more complex layout, including hierarchical row and column headers, in addition to having specialized vocabulary terms from that domain. To address this problem, we introduce the domain-specific Table QA dataset AIT-QA (Airline Industry Table QA). The dataset consists of 515 questions authored by human annotators on 116 tables extracted from public U.S. SEC filings (publicly available at: https://www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml) of major airline companies for the fiscal years 2017-2019. We also provide annotations pertaining to the nature of questions, marking those that require hierarchical headers, domain-specific terminology, and paraphrased forms. Our zero-shot baseline evaluation of three transformer-based SOTA Table QA methods - TaPAS (end-to-end), TaBERT (semantic parsing-based), and RCI (row-column encoding-based) - clearly exposes the limitation of these methods in this practical setting, with the best accuracy at just 51.8\% (RCI). We also present pragmatic table preprocessing steps used to pivot and project these complex tables into a layout suitable for the SOTA Table QA models.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. TableDreamer: Progressive and Weakness-guided Data Synthesis from Scratch for Table Instruction Tuning

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An iterative, weakness-guided data synthesis framework for table instruction tuning improves Llama3.1-8B by 11.6 average accuracy points using only 27K synthetic examples.

  2. ChartLens: Fine-grained Visual Attribution in Charts

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    ChartLens uses segmentation and set-of-marks prompting to attribute chart-based answers to specific visual elements, and the authors release a new benchmark for evaluating such attribution.

Pith tools