<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hurdles to Progress in Long-form Question Answering · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2103.06332/</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/2103.06332/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Hurdles to Progress in Long-form Question Answering — mentioned by rushingcreek</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34687166</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2103.06332:34687166</guid><pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2023 01:16:31 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Ah yes, it&amp;#x27;s this paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.06332. With recent advances in alignment, this problem has gotten much better. Furthermore, the LLM used in that paper is only ~400 million parameters, which is orders of magnitude smaller than models being used for this task today. Scale + alignment has been the solution so far.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2103.06332/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CL</category></item><item><title>Hurdles to Progress in Long-form Question Answering — mentioned by rushingcreek</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32006422</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2103.06332:32006422</guid><pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2022 20:31:10 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;d be happy to talk a bit about how we evaluated the model. The task we&amp;#x27;re performing is fundamentally long-form question answering (LFQA), and recent papers (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.06332.pdf) have shown that metrics such as ROUGE (used for the KITE benchmark) aren&amp;#x27;t great at evaluating the quality &amp;amp; truthfulness of generated answers. On our dataset, our approach is to use a combination of human evaluation (which is still arguably the most reliable metric used by the NLP research community to evaluate generated answer quality) and an entailment score (checking if a generated answer is…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2103.06332/"&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>
