Estimating the Usefulness of Clarifying Questions and Answers for Conversational Search
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- Authors Ivan Sekulić, Weronika Łajewska, Krisztian Balog, and Fabio Crestani address the gap in research on processing and comprehension of users' answers to clarifying questions in conversational search systems.
- Existing literature primarily focuses on constructing clarifying questions with a scarcity of studies on handling user responses effectively.
- The authors propose a novel method involving a classifier to assess the usefulness of both prompted clarifying questions and user-provided answers.
- The key innovation is integrating valuable insights into conversation history and feeding them into a transformer-based query rewriting module.
- Results show significant enhancements over strong non-mixed-initiative baselines, demonstrating the effectiveness of their methodology.
- The technique can mitigate performance drops by selectively incorporating relevant information from user interactions to improve the overall conversational search experience.
Authors: Ivan Sekulić, Weronika Łajewska, Krisztian Balog, Fabio Crestani
Abstract: While the body of research directed towards constructing and generating clarifying questions in mixed-initiative conversational search systems is vast, research aimed at processing and comprehending users' answers to such questions is scarce. To this end, we present a simple yet effective method for processing answers to clarifying questions, moving away from previous work that simply appends answers to the original query and thus potentially degrades retrieval performance. Specifically, we propose a classifier for assessing usefulness of the prompted clarifying question and an answer given by the user. Useful questions or answers are further appended to the conversation history and passed to a transformer-based query rewriting module. Results demonstrate significant improvements over strong non-mixed-initiative baselines. Furthermore, the proposed approach mitigates the performance drops when non useful questions and answers are utilized.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.