Scientific question answering (SQA) is an important task aimed at answering questions based on papers. However, current SQA datasets have limited reasoning types and neglect the relevance between tables and text, creating a significant gap with real scenarios. To address these challenges, we propose a QA benchmark for scientific tables and text with diverse reasoning types (SciTaT). To cover more reasoning types, we summarize various reasoning types from real-world questions. To involve both tables and text, we require the questions to incorporate tables and text as much as possible. Based on SciTaT, we propose a strong baseline (CaR), which combines various reasoning methods to address different reasoning types and process tables and text at the same time. CaR brings average improvements of 12.9% over other baselines on SciTaT, validating its effectiveness. Error analysis reveals the challenges of SciTaT, such as complex numerical calculations and domain knowledge.
SCITAT: A Question Answering Benchmark for Scientific Tables and Text Covering Diverse Reasoning Types
A new scientific question answering benchmark (SciTaT) and baseline (CaR) are proposed to address reasoning gaps, incorporating diverse reasoning types and integrating tables and text, achieving significant performance improvements.
- Year
- 2024
- Venue
- arXiv 2024
- Authors
- 9
- Hosting
- Abstract onlyARXIV-DEFAULT
Cite
Notes
Only stored in your browser.
Attribution
- Abstract & full text
- arxiv.org/abs/2412.11757ARXIV-DEFAULT
- TL;DR
- Semantic Scholar