Automatic Question Generation from Sentences
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Question Generation (QG) and Question Answering (QA) are some of the many chal- lenges for natural language understanding and interfaces. As humans need to ask good questions, the potential benefits from automated QG systems may assist them in meeting useful inquiry needs. In this pa- per, we consider an automatic Sentence-to-Question generation task, where given a sentence, the Question Generation (QG) system generates a set of questions for which the sentence contains, implies, or needs answers. To facilitate the question generation task, we build elementary sentences from the input complex sentences using a syntactic parser. A named entity recognizer and a part of speech tagger are applied on each of these sentences to encode necessary information. We classify the sentences based on their subject, verb, object and preposition for determining the possible type of questions to be generated. We use the TREC-2007 (Question Answering Track) dataset for our experiments and evaluation. Mots-cles : Generation de questions, Analyseur syntaxique, Phrases elementaires, POS Tagging.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it