Papers › AmazonQA: A Review-Based Question Answering Task
AmazonQA: A Review-Based Question Answering Task
Mansi Gupta, Nitish Kulkarni, Raghuveer Chanda, Anirudha Rayasam, Zachary C. Lipton
Every day, thousands of customers post questions on Amazon product pages. After some time, if they are fortunate, a knowledgeable customer might answer their question. Observing that many questions can be answered based upon the available product reviews, we propose the task of review-based QA. Given a corpus of reviews and a question, the QA system synthesizes an answer. To this end, we introduce a new dataset and propose a method that combines information retrieval techniques for selecting relevant reviews (given a question) and "reading comprehension" models for synthesizing an answer (given a question and review). Our dataset consists of 923k questions, 3.6M answers and 14M reviews across 156k products. Building on the well-known Amazon dataset, we collect additional annotations, marking each question as either answerable or unanswerable based on the available reviews. A deployed system could first classify a question as answerable and then attempt to generate an answer. Notably, unlike many popular QA datasets, here, the questions, passages, and answers are all extracted from real human interactions. We evaluate numerous models for answer generation and propose strong baselines, demonstrating the challenging nature of this new task.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Datasets
Introduced by this paper, per the archive.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections