Datasets:
Tasks:
Question Answering
Languages:
English
Multilinguality:
monolingual
Size Categories:
10K<n<100K
Language Creators:
found
Annotations Creators:
crowdsourced
Source Datasets:
original
ArXiv:
License:
File size: 21,690 Bytes
e05cbe2 |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 |
{
"dynabench.qa.r1.all": {
"description": "Dynabench.QA is a Reading Comprehension dataset collected using a human-and-model-in-the-loop. Round 1 is the AdversarialQA dataset from Bartolo et al., 2020, and consists of questions posed by crowdworkers on a set of Wikipedia articles using an adversarial model-in-the-loop.\n We use three different models; BiDAF (Seo et al., 2016), BERT-Large (Devlin et al., 2018), and RoBERTa-Large (Liu et al., 2019) in the annotation loop and construct three datasets; D(BiDAF), D(BERT), and D(RoBERTa), each with 10,000 training examples, 1,000 validation, and 1,000 test examples.\n The adversarial human annotation paradigm ensures that these datasets consist of questions that current state-of-the-art models (at least the ones used as adversaries in the annotation loop) find challenging.\n For more details on the dataset construction process, see https://adversarialqa.github.io.",
"citation": "@article{bartolo2020beat,\n author = {Bartolo, Max and Roberts, Alastair and Welbl, Johannes and Riedel, Sebastian and Stenetorp, Pontus},\n title = {Beat the AI: Investigating Adversarial Human Annotation for Reading Comprehension},\n journal = {Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics},\n volume = {8},\n number = {},\n pages = {662-678},\n year = {2020},\n doi = {10.1162/tacl_a_00338},\n URL = { https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00338 },\n eprint = { https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00338 },\n abstract = { Innovations in annotation methodology have been a catalyst for Reading Comprehension (RC) datasets and models. One recent trend to challenge current RC models is to involve a model in the annotation process: Humans create questions adversarially, such that the model fails to answer them correctly. In this work we investigate this annotation methodology and apply it in three different settings, collecting a total of 36,000 samples with progressively stronger models in the annotation loop. This allows us to explore questions such as the reproducibility of the adversarial effect, transfer from data collected with varying model-in-the-loop strengths, and generalization to data collected without a model. We find that training on adversarially collected samples leads to strong generalization to non-adversarially collected datasets, yet with progressive performance deterioration with increasingly stronger models-in-the-loop. Furthermore, we find that stronger models can still learn from datasets collected with substantially weaker models-in-the-loop. When trained on data collected with a BiDAF model in the loop, RoBERTa achieves 39.9F1 on questions that it cannot answer when trained on SQuAD\u2014only marginally lower than when trained on data collected using RoBERTa itself (41.0F1). }\n }",
"homepage": "https://dynabench.org/tasks/2",
"license": "",
"features": {
"id": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"title": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"context": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"question": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"answers": {
"feature": {
"text": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"answer_start": {
"dtype": "int32",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
}
},
"length": -1,
"id": null,
"_type": "Sequence"
},
"metadata": {
"split": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"round": {
"dtype": "int32",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"subset": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"model_in_the_loop": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
}
}
},
"post_processed": null,
"supervised_keys": null,
"builder_name": "dynabench_qa",
"config_name": "dynabench.qa.r1.all",
"version": {
"version_str": "1.0.0",
"description": null,
"major": 1,
"minor": 0,
"patch": 0
},
"splits": {
"train": {
"name": "train",
"num_bytes": 28188806,
"num_examples": 30000,
"dataset_name": "dynabench_qa"
},
"validation": {
"name": "validation",
"num_bytes": 2790132,
"num_examples": 3000,
"dataset_name": "dynabench_qa"
},
"test": {
"name": "test",
"num_bytes": 2952647,
"num_examples": 3000,
"dataset_name": "dynabench_qa"
}
},
"download_checksums": {
"https://adversarialqa.github.io/data/aqa_v1.0.zip": {
"num_bytes": 9018914,
"checksum": "f4f3c23224a5060b28c35e35581bd5cf46256dda3665418fb83d036d0e0c93cf"
}
},
"download_size": 9018914,
"post_processing_size": null,
"dataset_size": 33931585,
"size_in_bytes": 42950499
},
"dynabench.qa.r1.dbidaf": {
"description": "Dynabench.QA is a Reading Comprehension dataset collected using a human-and-model-in-the-loop. Round 1 is the AdversarialQA dataset from Bartolo et al., 2020, and consists of questions posed by crowdworkers on a set of Wikipedia articles using an adversarial model-in-the-loop.\n We use three different models; BiDAF (Seo et al., 2016), BERT-Large (Devlin et al., 2018), and RoBERTa-Large (Liu et al., 2019) in the annotation loop and construct three datasets; D(BiDAF), D(BERT), and D(RoBERTa), each with 10,000 training examples, 1,000 validation, and 1,000 test examples.\n The adversarial human annotation paradigm ensures that these datasets consist of questions that current state-of-the-art models (at least the ones used as adversaries in the annotation loop) find challenging.\n For more details on the dataset construction process, see https://adversarialqa.github.io.",
"citation": "@article{bartolo2020beat,\n author = {Bartolo, Max and Roberts, Alastair and Welbl, Johannes and Riedel, Sebastian and Stenetorp, Pontus},\n title = {Beat the AI: Investigating Adversarial Human Annotation for Reading Comprehension},\n journal = {Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics},\n volume = {8},\n number = {},\n pages = {662-678},\n year = {2020},\n doi = {10.1162/tacl_a_00338},\n URL = { https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00338 },\n eprint = { https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00338 },\n abstract = { Innovations in annotation methodology have been a catalyst for Reading Comprehension (RC) datasets and models. One recent trend to challenge current RC models is to involve a model in the annotation process: Humans create questions adversarially, such that the model fails to answer them correctly. In this work we investigate this annotation methodology and apply it in three different settings, collecting a total of 36,000 samples with progressively stronger models in the annotation loop. This allows us to explore questions such as the reproducibility of the adversarial effect, transfer from data collected with varying model-in-the-loop strengths, and generalization to data collected without a model. We find that training on adversarially collected samples leads to strong generalization to non-adversarially collected datasets, yet with progressive performance deterioration with increasingly stronger models-in-the-loop. Furthermore, we find that stronger models can still learn from datasets collected with substantially weaker models-in-the-loop. When trained on data collected with a BiDAF model in the loop, RoBERTa achieves 39.9F1 on questions that it cannot answer when trained on SQuAD\u2014only marginally lower than when trained on data collected using RoBERTa itself (41.0F1). }\n }",
"homepage": "https://dynabench.org/tasks/2",
"license": "",
"features": {
"id": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"title": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"context": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"question": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"answers": {
"feature": {
"text": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"answer_start": {
"dtype": "int32",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
}
},
"length": -1,
"id": null,
"_type": "Sequence"
},
"metadata": {
"split": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"round": {
"dtype": "int32",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"subset": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"model_in_the_loop": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
}
}
},
"post_processed": null,
"supervised_keys": null,
"builder_name": "dynabench_qa",
"config_name": "dynabench.qa.r1.dbidaf",
"version": {
"version_str": "1.0.0",
"description": null,
"major": 1,
"minor": 0,
"patch": 0
},
"splits": {
"train": {
"name": "train",
"num_bytes": 9422522,
"num_examples": 10000,
"dataset_name": "dynabench_qa"
},
"validation": {
"name": "validation",
"num_bytes": 931947,
"num_examples": 1000,
"dataset_name": "dynabench_qa"
},
"test": {
"name": "test",
"num_bytes": 961115,
"num_examples": 1000,
"dataset_name": "dynabench_qa"
}
},
"download_checksums": {
"https://adversarialqa.github.io/data/aqa_v1.0.zip": {
"num_bytes": 9018914,
"checksum": "f4f3c23224a5060b28c35e35581bd5cf46256dda3665418fb83d036d0e0c93cf"
}
},
"download_size": 9018914,
"post_processing_size": null,
"dataset_size": 11315584,
"size_in_bytes": 20334498
},
"dynabench.qa.r1.dbert": {
"description": "Dynabench.QA is a Reading Comprehension dataset collected using a human-and-model-in-the-loop. Round 1 is the AdversarialQA dataset from Bartolo et al., 2020, and consists of questions posed by crowdworkers on a set of Wikipedia articles using an adversarial model-in-the-loop.\n We use three different models; BiDAF (Seo et al., 2016), BERT-Large (Devlin et al., 2018), and RoBERTa-Large (Liu et al., 2019) in the annotation loop and construct three datasets; D(BiDAF), D(BERT), and D(RoBERTa), each with 10,000 training examples, 1,000 validation, and 1,000 test examples.\n The adversarial human annotation paradigm ensures that these datasets consist of questions that current state-of-the-art models (at least the ones used as adversaries in the annotation loop) find challenging.\n For more details on the dataset construction process, see https://adversarialqa.github.io.",
"citation": "@article{bartolo2020beat,\n author = {Bartolo, Max and Roberts, Alastair and Welbl, Johannes and Riedel, Sebastian and Stenetorp, Pontus},\n title = {Beat the AI: Investigating Adversarial Human Annotation for Reading Comprehension},\n journal = {Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics},\n volume = {8},\n number = {},\n pages = {662-678},\n year = {2020},\n doi = {10.1162/tacl_a_00338},\n URL = { https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00338 },\n eprint = { https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00338 },\n abstract = { Innovations in annotation methodology have been a catalyst for Reading Comprehension (RC) datasets and models. One recent trend to challenge current RC models is to involve a model in the annotation process: Humans create questions adversarially, such that the model fails to answer them correctly. In this work we investigate this annotation methodology and apply it in three different settings, collecting a total of 36,000 samples with progressively stronger models in the annotation loop. This allows us to explore questions such as the reproducibility of the adversarial effect, transfer from data collected with varying model-in-the-loop strengths, and generalization to data collected without a model. We find that training on adversarially collected samples leads to strong generalization to non-adversarially collected datasets, yet with progressive performance deterioration with increasingly stronger models-in-the-loop. Furthermore, we find that stronger models can still learn from datasets collected with substantially weaker models-in-the-loop. When trained on data collected with a BiDAF model in the loop, RoBERTa achieves 39.9F1 on questions that it cannot answer when trained on SQuAD\u2014only marginally lower than when trained on data collected using RoBERTa itself (41.0F1). }\n }",
"homepage": "https://dynabench.org/tasks/2",
"license": "",
"features": {
"id": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"title": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"context": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"question": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"answers": {
"feature": {
"text": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"answer_start": {
"dtype": "int32",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
}
},
"length": -1,
"id": null,
"_type": "Sequence"
},
"metadata": {
"split": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"round": {
"dtype": "int32",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"subset": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"model_in_the_loop": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
}
}
},
"post_processed": null,
"supervised_keys": null,
"builder_name": "dynabench_qa",
"config_name": "dynabench.qa.r1.dbert",
"version": {
"version_str": "1.0.0",
"description": null,
"major": 1,
"minor": 0,
"patch": 0
},
"splits": {
"train": {
"name": "train",
"num_bytes": 9475561,
"num_examples": 10000,
"dataset_name": "dynabench_qa"
},
"validation": {
"name": "validation",
"num_bytes": 931196,
"num_examples": 1000,
"dataset_name": "dynabench_qa"
},
"test": {
"name": "test",
"num_bytes": 984458,
"num_examples": 1000,
"dataset_name": "dynabench_qa"
}
},
"download_checksums": {
"https://adversarialqa.github.io/data/aqa_v1.0.zip": {
"num_bytes": 9018914,
"checksum": "f4f3c23224a5060b28c35e35581bd5cf46256dda3665418fb83d036d0e0c93cf"
}
},
"download_size": 9018914,
"post_processing_size": null,
"dataset_size": 11391215,
"size_in_bytes": 20410129
},
"dynabench.qa.r1.droberta": {
"description": "Dynabench.QA is a Reading Comprehension dataset collected using a human-and-model-in-the-loop. Round 1 is the AdversarialQA dataset from Bartolo et al., 2020, and consists of questions posed by crowdworkers on a set of Wikipedia articles using an adversarial model-in-the-loop.\n We use three different models; BiDAF (Seo et al., 2016), BERT-Large (Devlin et al., 2018), and RoBERTa-Large (Liu et al., 2019) in the annotation loop and construct three datasets; D(BiDAF), D(BERT), and D(RoBERTa), each with 10,000 training examples, 1,000 validation, and 1,000 test examples.\n The adversarial human annotation paradigm ensures that these datasets consist of questions that current state-of-the-art models (at least the ones used as adversaries in the annotation loop) find challenging.\n For more details on the dataset construction process, see https://adversarialqa.github.io.",
"citation": "@article{bartolo2020beat,\n author = {Bartolo, Max and Roberts, Alastair and Welbl, Johannes and Riedel, Sebastian and Stenetorp, Pontus},\n title = {Beat the AI: Investigating Adversarial Human Annotation for Reading Comprehension},\n journal = {Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics},\n volume = {8},\n number = {},\n pages = {662-678},\n year = {2020},\n doi = {10.1162/tacl_a_00338},\n URL = { https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00338 },\n eprint = { https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00338 },\n abstract = { Innovations in annotation methodology have been a catalyst for Reading Comprehension (RC) datasets and models. One recent trend to challenge current RC models is to involve a model in the annotation process: Humans create questions adversarially, such that the model fails to answer them correctly. In this work we investigate this annotation methodology and apply it in three different settings, collecting a total of 36,000 samples with progressively stronger models in the annotation loop. This allows us to explore questions such as the reproducibility of the adversarial effect, transfer from data collected with varying model-in-the-loop strengths, and generalization to data collected without a model. We find that training on adversarially collected samples leads to strong generalization to non-adversarially collected datasets, yet with progressive performance deterioration with increasingly stronger models-in-the-loop. Furthermore, we find that stronger models can still learn from datasets collected with substantially weaker models-in-the-loop. When trained on data collected with a BiDAF model in the loop, RoBERTa achieves 39.9F1 on questions that it cannot answer when trained on SQuAD\u2014only marginally lower than when trained on data collected using RoBERTa itself (41.0F1). }\n }",
"homepage": "https://dynabench.org/tasks/2",
"license": "",
"features": {
"id": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"title": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"context": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"question": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"answers": {
"feature": {
"text": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"answer_start": {
"dtype": "int32",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
}
},
"length": -1,
"id": null,
"_type": "Sequence"
},
"metadata": {
"split": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"round": {
"dtype": "int32",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"subset": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
},
"model_in_the_loop": {
"dtype": "string",
"id": null,
"_type": "Value"
}
}
},
"post_processed": null,
"supervised_keys": null,
"builder_name": "dynabench_qa",
"config_name": "dynabench.qa.r1.droberta",
"version": {
"version_str": "1.0.0",
"description": null,
"major": 1,
"minor": 0,
"patch": 0
},
"splits": {
"train": {
"name": "train",
"num_bytes": 9430723,
"num_examples": 10000,
"dataset_name": "dynabench_qa"
},
"validation": {
"name": "validation",
"num_bytes": 941069,
"num_examples": 1000,
"dataset_name": "dynabench_qa"
},
"test": {
"name": "test",
"num_bytes": 1021410,
"num_examples": 1000,
"dataset_name": "dynabench_qa"
}
},
"download_checksums": {
"https://adversarialqa.github.io/data/aqa_v1.0.zip": {
"num_bytes": 9018914,
"checksum": "f4f3c23224a5060b28c35e35581bd5cf46256dda3665418fb83d036d0e0c93cf"
}
},
"download_size": 9018914,
"post_processing_size": null,
"dataset_size": 11393202,
"size_in_bytes": 20412116
}
} |