In this task, you will be presented with a context from an academic paper and a question separated with a 
. You have to answer the question based on the context.

[Q]: We evaluate our model on both English and Chinese segmentation. For both languages we used standard datasets for word segmentation and language modeling. English
The Brent corpus is a standard corpus used in statistical modeling of child language acquisition BIBREF15 , BIBREF16  We use the commonly used version of the PTB prepared by BIBREF17 Since Chinese orthography does not mark spaces between words, there have been a number of efforts to annotate word boundaries. We evaluate against two corpora that have been manually segmented according different segmentation standards. The Beijing University Corpus was one of the corpora used for the International Chinese Word Segmentation Bakeoff BIBREF18 . We use the Penn Chinese Treebank Version 5.1 BIBREF19 . 
 Question: What dataset is used?
[A]: Brent corpus PTB  Beijing University Corpus Penn Chinese Treebank


[Q]: Our model yields the best results on both UAS and LAS metrics of all languages except the Japanese. As for Japanese, our model gives unsatisfactory results because the original treebank was written in Roman phonetic characters instead of hiragana, which is used by both common Japanese writing and our pre-trained embeddings. Despite this, our model overall still gives 1.0% higher average UAS and LAS than the previous best parser, BIAF. Although both BIAF and STACKPTR parsers have achieved relatively high parsing accuracies on the 12 languages and have all UAS higher than 90%, our model achieves state-of-the-art results in all languages for both UAS and LAS. Overall, our model reports more than 1.0% higher average UAS than STACKPTR and 0.3% higher than BIAF. 
 Question: What are performance compared to former models?
[A]: model overall still gives 1.0% higher average UAS and LAS than the previous best parser, BIAF our model reports more than 1.0% higher average UAS than STACKPTR and 0.3% higher than BIAF


[Q]: In this work, we introduce a methodology that provides VQA algorithms with the ability to generate human interpretable attention maps which effectively ground the answer to the relevant image regions. We accomplish this by leveraging region descriptions and object annotations available in the Visual Genome dataset, and using these to automatically construct attention maps that can be used for attention supervision, instead of requiring human annotators to manually provide grounding labels. 
 Question: How do they obtain region descriptions and object annotations?
[A]:
they are available in the Visual Genome dataset