<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>A Thorough Examination of the CNN/Daily Mail Reading Comprehension Task · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1606.02858/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1606.02858/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>A Thorough Examination of the CNN/Daily Mail Reading Comprehension Task — mentioned by dmreedy</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12255283</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1606.02858:12255283</guid><pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2016 15:33:54 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I think you&amp;#x27;re dead on. And I&amp;#x27;m nervous about a coming winter, because of disappointment in all the wolf-crying we&amp;#x27;re doing about how good at Natural Language we&amp;#x27;re getting. When we&amp;#x27;ve barely scratched the surface. This latest bot fad worries me. A further comment on deep methods being state of the art currently: I wonder how well these tasks really measure progress in natural language understanding (I really don&amp;#x27;t like isolating that term as some distinct subdiscipline of broader AI goals, but so be it). Some of Chris Manning&amp;#x27;s students[1] have at least started down the path of examining…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1606.02858/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CL</category></item></channel></rss>
