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.

Q: GE-FL reduces the heavy load of instance annotation and performs well when we provide prior knowledge with no bias. In our experiments, we observe that comparable numbers of labeled features for each class have to be supplied. We randomly select $t \in [1, 20]$ features from the feature pool for one class, and only one feature for the other. Our methods are also evaluated on datasets with different unbalanced class distributions. We manually construct several movie datasets with class distributions of 1:2, 1:3, 1:4 by randomly removing 50%, 67%, 75% positive documents. Incorporating KL divergence is robust enough to control unbalance both in the dataset and in labeled features while the other three methods are not so competitive.

A: How do they define robustness of a model?
****
Q: We use two datasets in this work: the training is done on the Fisher Corpus English Part 1 (LDC2004S13) BIBREF15 and testing on the Suicide Risk Assessment corpus BIBREF16 , along with Fisher.

A: Which dataset do they use to learn embeddings?
****
Q: We evaluate a character-level variant of our proposed language model over a preprocessed version of the Penn Treebank (PTB) and Text8 datasets. The unsupervised constituency parsing task compares hte tree structure inferred by the model with those annotated by human experts. The experiment is performed on WSJ10 dataset.

A:
Which dataset do they experiment with?
****