@inproceedings{wang-etal-2024-controversialqa,
    title = "{C}ontroversial{QA}: Exploring Controversy in Question Answering",
    author = "Wang, Zhen  and
      Zhu, Peide  and
      Yang, Jie",
    editor = "Calzolari, Nicoletta  and
      Kan, Min-Yen  and
      Hoste, Veronique  and
      Lenci, Alessandro  and
      Sakti, Sakriani  and
      Xue, Nianwen",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2024 Joint International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-COLING 2024)",
    month = may,
    year = "2024",
    address = "Torino, Italia",
    publisher = "ELRA and ICCL",
    url = "https://aclanthology.org/2024.lrec-main.351",
    pages = "3962--3966",
    abstract = "Controversy is widespread online. Previous studies mainly define controversy based on vague assumptions of its relation to sentiment such as hate speech and offensive words. This paper introduces the first question-answering dataset that defines content controversy by user perception, i.e., votes from plenty of users. It contains nearly 10K questions, and each question has a best answer and a most controversial answer. Experimental results reveal that controversy detection in question answering is essential and challenging, and there is no strong correlation between controversy and sentiment tasks. We also show that controversial answers and most acceptable answers cannot be distinguished by retrieval-based QA models, which may cause controversy issues. With these insights, we believe ControversialQA can inspire future research on controversy in QA systems.",
}

Controversy is widespread online. Previous studies mainly define controversy based on vague assumptions of its relation to sentiment such as hate speech and offensive words. This paper introduces the first question-answering dataset that defines content controversy by user perception, i.e., votes from plenty of users. It contains nearly 10K questions, and each question has a best answer and a most controversial answer. Experimental results reveal that controversy detection in question answering is essential and challenging, and there is no strong correlation between controversy and sentiment tasks. We also show that controversial answers and most acceptable answers cannot be distinguished by retrieval-based QA models, which may cause controversy issues. With these insights, we believe ControversialQA can inspire future research on controversy in QA systems.
Wang, Zhen Zhu, Peide Yang, Jie
ControversialQA: Exploring Controversy in Question Answering