File size: 1,852 Bytes
7e267bf
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
# Trivia QA

### Paper

Title: `TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehension`
Abstract: https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.03551

TriviaQA is a reading comprehension dataset containing over 650K question-answer-evidence
triples. TriviaQA includes 95K question-answer pairs authored by trivia enthusiasts
and independently gathered evidence documents, six per question on average, that provide
high quality distant supervision for answering the questions.

Homepage: https://nlp.cs.washington.edu/triviaqa/


### Citation

```
@InProceedings{JoshiTriviaQA2017,
    author = {Joshi, Mandar and Choi, Eunsol and Weld, Daniel S. and Zettlemoyer, Luke},
    title = {TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehension},
    booktitle = {Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics},
    month = {July},
    year = {2017},
    address = {Vancouver, Canada},
    publisher = {Association for Computational Linguistics},
}
```

### Groups and Tasks

#### Groups

* Not part of a group yet.

#### Tasks

* `triviaqa`: `Generate and answer based on the question.`

### Checklist

For adding novel benchmarks/datasets to the library:
* [ ] Is the task an existing benchmark in the literature?
  * [ ] Have you referenced the original paper that introduced the task?
  * [ ] If yes, does the original paper provide a reference implementation? If so, have you checked against the reference implementation and documented how to run such a test?


If other tasks on this dataset are already supported:
* [ ] Is the "Main" variant of this task clearly denoted?
* [ ] Have you provided a short sentence in a README on what each new variant adds / evaluates?
* [ ] Have you noted which, if any, published evaluation setups are matched by this variant?