Papers › DuQM: A Chinese Dataset of Linguistically Perturbed Natural Questions for Evaluating...

DuQM: A Chinese Dataset of Linguistically Perturbed Natural Questions for Evaluating the Robustness of Question Matching Models

16 Dec 2021arXiv:2112.08609archive 2025-07-28

Hongyu Zhu, Yan Chen, Jing Yan, Jing Liu, Yu Hong, Ying Chen, Hua Wu, Haifeng Wang

In this paper, we focus on studying robustness evaluation of Chinese question matching. Most of the previous work on analyzing robustness issue focus on just one or a few types of artificial adversarial examples. Instead, we argue that it is necessary to formulate a comprehensive evaluation about the linguistic capabilities of models on natural texts. For this purpose, we create a Chinese dataset namely DuQM which contains natural questions with linguistic perturbations to evaluate the robustness of question matching models. DuQM contains 3 categories and 13 subcategories with 32 linguistic perturbations. The extensive experiments demonstrate that DuQM has a better ability to distinguish different models. Importantly, the detailed breakdown of evaluation by linguistic phenomenon in DuQM helps us easily diagnose the strength and weakness of different models. Additionally, our experiment results show that the effect of artificial adversarial examples does not work on the natural texts.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

baidu/DuReader officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHubtf 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

Natural Questions

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