based on the words in the questions
that are sometimes expanded with synonyms. For example, ASU QA takes dozens of patterns for each question type
from the questions and answers seen
previously during the training process.
It transforms the question, say, “Who
is the CEO of IBM?” into the Google
query “became the CEO of IBM” because it has previously seen the answer
“Washington” to the question “What is
the capital of the U.S.?” in the sentence
“Washington became the capital of the
U.S. on June 11, 1800.”
Since many of the factual answers
are named entities (such as people, organizations, countries, and cities), QA
systems typically employ third-party
named-entity-identification techniques
to extract candidate answers (such as
Minipar). 1 All named entities in the
proximity of the question words and
that match the desired semantic category are identified as candidate answers. Meanwhile, ASU QA, employs a
pattern-matching mechanism to perform answer extraction. A sentence like
“Samuel Palmisano recently became
the CEO of IBM” matches the pattern
“<A> became <Q>,” where <A> = “
Samuel Palmisano recently” is the candidate
answer, and <Q> = “the CEO of IBM” is
the question’s focus. ASU QA also treats
all subphrases from each candidate answer as candidates themselves. In the
example, the subphrases are “Samuel
Palmisano recently,” “Samuel Palmisano,” “Palmisano recently,” “Samuel,”
“Palmisano,” and “recently.”
In order to identify the most probable
(supported) answer, ASU QA has gone
several steps beyond frequency counts
explored earlier by Dumais et al. 1 and
other groups involved in TREC competitions that involved a probabilistic triangulation mechanism. Triangulation
is a term widely used in the intelligence
and journalism fields for confirming or
disconfirming facts by checking multiple sources. Roussinov’s and Robles’s
algorithm is demonstrated through the
following intuitive example: Imagine
that we have two candidate answers for
the question “What was the purpose
of the Manhattan Project?”: ( 1) “To develop a nuclear bomb” or ( 2) “To create an atomic weapon.” They support
(triangulate) with each other since they
are semantically similar. In the example involving the CEO of IBM, “Samuel
Palmisano” and “Sam Palmisano” win
because they reinforce each other.
Although QA technology is maturing quickly and seems promising for a
number of practical applications (such
as commonsense reasoning and database federation), few QA systems go
beyond information seeking. Although
the Ford Motor Company and Nike, Inc.
began using Ask.com as their site search
engine in 2005, they’ve never reported
if QA features are indeed practical and
useful. In 2005, Roussinov and Robles
demonstrated empirically that ASU QA
helps locate potentially malevolent online content, potentially helping law-en-forcement and public oversight groups
combat the proliferation of materials
that threaten cybersecurity or promote
terrorism.
feature comparison
When comparing features and performing our informal evaluation, we chose
only the QA systems (see Table 1) mentioned in popular IT magazines or academic publications and that were (and
still are) available online during the first
run of our study in spring 2005. We did
not include Google or MSN since their
QA capabilities were (and still are) quite
limited. Google occasionally produces
precise answers with respect to geogra-phy-related questions (such as “What
is the population of Cambodia?”) but
does not attempt to target more general
or dynamic topics (such as “Who is the
CEO of Motorola?”) or more grammatically or semantically challenging questions (“How long can a British Prime
Minister serve in office?”). MSN uses
only Encyclopedia Encarta as a source of
precise answers and is similarly limited
in terms of complexity and coverage.
Although AskJeeves enjoyed immense popularity and investor interest at the time it was acquired, its QA
capabilities are limited in practice. Its
answers to natural-language questions
could be provided only from manually created databases, and the topics
of inquiry were limited to simple “
encyclopedic” requests (such as “What is
the population of Uganda?”). When the
question does not match any of the anticipated questions, Ask.com would reroute the question as a simple keyword
query to its underlying keyword search
engine—Teoma, which was acquired by
Ask.com in 2001 when it was a failing
dot-com based on technology originally
created by IBM and further developed
at Rutgers University. In 2005, Ask.com
introduced certain answer-matching
capabilities over the entire Web but is
still short of specifying the precise answer while displaying a set of ordered
snippets (up to 200) with the words
from the highlighted question, similar
to Google’s approach.
table 1: features of selected Web (open-domain) Qa systems.
technology/
output format multilingual algorithms
up to 200 rank- Yes undisclosed
ordered snippets
Commercial up to 10 snippets no undisclosed
or sentences
Commercial/ up to 10 snippets no
research
prototype
system Purpose
AskJeeves Commercial
crawling
entire Web
brainboost
meta search
language
Computer
demo
Answerbus Commercial/ up to 10
research sentences
prototype
Yes
nsir
research
prototype
exact answers or no
snippets
Asu QA
research
prototype
up to 20 snippets no
deep parsing, meta search
theorem proving,
large taxonomy of
answer types
shallow parsing, meta search
entity extraction,
small taxonomy
of answer types
shallow parsing, meta search
entity extraction,
small taxonomy
of answer types
pattern matching, meta search
small taxonomy
of answer types