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.

Input: Consider Input: Above all, we introduce two common baselines. The first one just selects the leading sentences to form a summary. It is often used as an official baseline of DUC, and we name it "LEAD". The other system is called "QUERY_SIM", which directly ranks sentences according to its TF-IDF cosine similarity to the query. Above all, we introduce two common baselines. The first one just selects the leading sentences to form a summary. It is often used as an official baseline of DUC, and we name it "LEAD". The other system is called "QUERY_SIM", which directly ranks sentences according to its TF-IDF cosine similarity to the query. In addition, we implement two popular extractive query-focused summarization methods, called MultiMR BIBREF2 and SVR BIBREF20 . Since our model is totally data-driven, we introduce a recent summarization system DocEmb BIBREF9 that also just use deep neural network features to rank sentences. To verify the effectiveness of the joint model, we design a baseline called ISOLATION, which performs saliency ranking and relevance ranking in isolation.
Question: What models do they compare to?

Output: LEAD QUERY_SIM MultiMR SVR DocEmb ISOLATION

Input: Consider Input: Thus, for this work, we build upon Hybrid Code Networks (HCN) BIBREF4 since HCNs achieve state-of-the-art performance in a data-efficient way for task-oriented dialogs, and propose AE-HCNs which extend HCNs with an autoencoder (Figure FIGREF8 ). AE-HCN(-CNN) outperforms HCN on Test-OOD by a large margin about 17(20) points on average while keeping the minimum performance trade-off compared to Test.
Question: By how much does their method outperform state-of-the-art OOD detection?

Output: AE-HCN outperforms by 17%, AE-HCN-CNN outperforms by 20% on average

Input: Consider Input: In particular, we use Semeval 2014 BIBREF34 Twitter Sentiment Analysis Dataset for the training Sarcasm Datasets Used in the Experiment
This dataset was created by BIBREF8 . The tweets were downloaded from Twitter using #sarcasm as a marker for sarcastic tweets. It is a monolingual English dataset which consists of a balanced distribution of 50,000 sarcastic tweets and 50,000 non-sarcastic tweets.

Since sarcastic tweets are less frequently used BIBREF8 , we also need to investigate the robustness of the selected features and the model trained on these features on an imbalanced dataset. To this end, we used another English dataset from BIBREF8 . It consists of 25,000 sarcastic tweets and 75,000 non-sarcastic tweets.

We have obtained this dataset from The Sarcasm Detector. It contains 120,000 tweets, out of which 20,000 are sarcastic and 100,000 are non-sarcastic. We randomly sampled 10,000 sarcastic and 20,000 non-sarcastic tweets from the dataset. Visualization of both the original and subset data show similar characteristics.
Question: Which benchmark datasets are used?
Output: Semeval 2014 BIBREF34 Twitter Sentiment Analysis Dataset dataset was created by BIBREF8 English dataset from BIBREF8 dataset from The Sarcasm Detector