SS-BERT: A Semantic Information Selecting Approach for Open-Domain Question Answering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Open-Domain Question Answering (Open-Domain QA) aims to answer any factoid questions from users. Recent progress in Open-Domain QA adopts the “retriever-reader” structure, which has proven effective. Retriever methods are mainly categorized as sparse retrievers and dense retrievers. In recent work, the dense retriever showed a stronger semantic interpretation than the sparse retriever. When training a dual-encoder dense retriever for document retrieval and reranking, there are two challenges: negative selection and a lack of training data. In this study, we make three major contributions to this topic: negative selection by query generation, data augmentation from negatives, and a passage evaluation method. We prove that the model performs better by focusing on false negatives and data augmentation in the Open-Domain QA passage rerank task. Our model outperforms other single dual-encoder rerankers over BERT-base and BM25 by 0.7 in MRR@10, achieving the highest Recall@50 and the max Recall@1000, which is restricted by the BM25 retrieval results.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".