In this task, you will be presented with a context from an academic paper and you have to write an answerable question based on the context. Your questions can be extractive, abstractive, or yes-no questions.

[EX Q]: Adaptation to food domain captioning Consequently, the food dataset has 3,806 images for training and 1,775 for validation. The non-food dataset has 78,976 images for training and 38,749 for validation.
[EX A]: How many examples are there in the target domain?

[EX Q]: Before designing this NLP toolkit, we conducted a survey among engineers and identified a spectrum of three typical personas.
[EX A]: How do the authors evidence the claim that many engineers find it a big overhead to choose from multiple frameworks, models and optimization techniques?

[EX Q]: The main questions this paper attempts to answer are: Does compressing BERT impede it's ability to transfer to new tasks? And does fine-tuning make BERT more or less compressible?

To explore these questions, we compressed English BERT using magnitude weight pruning BIBREF8 and observed the results on transfer learning to the General Language Understanding Evaluation (GLUE) benchmark BIBREF9, a diverse set of natural language understanding tasks including sentiment analysis, NLI, and textual similarity evaluation. We chose magnitude weight pruning, which compresses models by removing weights close to 0, because it is one of the most fine-grained and effective compression methods and because there are many interesting ways to view pruning, which we explore in the next section. Our findings are as follows: Low levels of pruning (30-40%) do not increase pre-training loss or affect transfer to downstream tasks at all. Medium levels of pruning increase the pre-training loss and prevent useful pre-training information from being transferred to downstream tasks.
[EX A]:
How they observe that fine-tuning BERT on a specific task does not improve its prunability?