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.

Ex Input:
The input for both tasks consists of news articles in free-text format, collected from 36 propagandist and 12 non-propagandist news outlets and then annotated by professional annotators.
Question: What dataset was used?

Ex Output:
news articles in free-text format

Ex Input:
More than 2,100 texts were paired with 15 questions each, resulting in a total number of approx. 32,000 annotated questions. For 13% of the questions, the workers did not agree on one of the 4 categories with a 3 out of 5 majority, so we did not include these questions in our dataset.

The distribution of category labels on the remaining 87% is shown in Table TABREF10 . 14,074 (52%) questions could be answered. Out of the answerable questions, 10,160 could be answered from the text directly (text-based) and 3,914 questions required the use of commonsense knowledge (script-based). After removing 135 questions during the validation, the final dataset comprises 13,939 questions, 3,827 of which require commonsense knowledge (i.e. 27.4%). This ratio was manually verified based on a random sample of questions.
Question: what dataset statistics are provided?

Ex Output:
More than 2,100 texts were paired with 15 questions each, resulting in a total number of approx. 32,000 annotated questions. 13% of the questions are not answerable. Out of the answerable questions, 10,160 could be answered from the text directly (text-based) and 3,914 questions required the use of commonsense knowledge (script-based). The final dataset comprises 13,939 questions, 3,827 of which require commonsense knowledge (i.e. 27.4%).

Ex Input:
Ablation Study
To further investigate the efficacy of the key components in our framework, namely, THA and STN, we perform ablation study as shown in the second block of Table TABREF39 . The results show that each of THA and STN is helpful for improving the performance, and the contribution of STN is slightly larger than THA. "OURS w/o THA & STN" only keeps the basic bi-linear attention. Although it performs not bad, it is still less competitive compared with the strongest baseline (i.e., CMLA), suggesting that only using attention mechanism to distill opinion summary is not enough. After inserting the STN component before the bi-linear attention, i.e. "OURS w/o THA", we get about 1% absolute gains on each dataset, and then the performance is comparable to CMLA. By adding THA, i.e. "OURS", the performance is further improved, and all state-of-the-art methods are surpassed.
Question: Do they explore how useful is the detection history and opinion summary?

Ex Output:
Yes