Papers › Determining Question-Answer Plausibility in Crowdsourced Datasets Using Multi-Task Learning

Determining Question-Answer Plausibility in Crowdsourced Datasets Using Multi-Task Learning

10 Nov 2020EMNLP (WNUT) 2020 11arXiv:2011.04883archive 2025-07-28

Rachel Gardner, Maya Varma, Clare Zhu, Ranjay Krishna

Datasets extracted from social networks and online forums are often prone to the pitfalls of natural language, namely the presence of unstructured and noisy data. In this work, we seek to enable the collection of high-quality question-answer datasets from social media by proposing a novel task for automated quality analysis and data cleaning: question-answer (QA) plausibility. Given a machine or user-generated question and a crowd-sourced response from a social media user, we determine if the question and response are valid; if so, we identify the answer within the free-form response. We design BERT-based models to perform the QA plausibility task, and we evaluate the ability of our models to generate a clean, usable question-answer dataset. Our highest-performing approach consists of a single-task model which determines the plausibility of the question, followed by a multi-task model which evaluates the plausibility of the response as well as extracts answers (Question Plausibility AUROC=0.75, Response Plausibility AUROC=0.78, Answer Extraction F1=0.665).

PaperPDFConference PDFCode

Code

rachel-1/qa_plausibility officialmentioned in paperpytorch report

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

Multi-Task Learning

1 archive task tag without a task page not shown.

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