Community-based question answering platforms can be rich sources of information on a variety of specialized topics, from finance to cooking. The usefulness of such platforms depends heavily on user contributions (questions and answers), but also on respecting the community rules. As a crowd-sourced service, such platforms rely on their users for monitoring and flagging content that violates community rules. Common wisdom is to eliminate the users who receive many flags. Our analysis of a year of traces from a mature Q&A site shows that the number of flags does not tell the full story: on one hand, users with many flags may still contribute positively to the community. On the other hand, users who never get flagged are found to violate community rules and get their accounts suspended. This analysis, however, also shows that abusive users are betrayed by their network properties: we find strong evidence of homophilous behavior and use this finding to detect abusive users who go under the community radar. Based on our empirical observations, we build a classifier that is able to detect abusive users with an accuracy as high as 83 .
As for applications, research has proposed effective ways of recommending questions to the most appropriate answerers @cite_19 @cite_27 , of automatically answering questions based on past answers @cite_24 , and of retrieving factual answers @cite_15 or factual bits within an answer @cite_14 .
@cite_14 @cite_24 @cite_19 @cite_27 @cite_15
1986044318 2572223286 2798836595 2122778642
The rapidly increasing popularity of community-based Question Answering (cQA) services, e.g. Yahoo! Answers, Baidu Zhidao, etc. have attracted great attention from both academia and industry. Besides the basic problems, like question searching and answer finding, it should be noted that the low participation rate of users in cQA service is the crucial problem which limits its development potential. In this paper, we focus on addressing this problem by recommending answer providers, in which a question is given as a query and a ranked list of users is returned according to the likelihood of answering the question. Based on the intuitive idea for recommendation, we try to introduce topic-level model to improve heuristic term-level methods, which are treated as the baselines. The proposed approach consists of two steps: (1) discovering latent topics in the content of questions and answers as well as latent interests of users to build user profiles; (2) recommending question answerers for new arrival questions based on latent topics and term-level model. Specifically, we develop a general generative model for questions and answers in cQA, which is then altered to obtain a novel computationally tractable Bayesian network model. Experiments are carried out on a real-world data crawled from Yahoo! Answers during Jun 12 2007 to Aug 04 2007, which consists of 118510 questions, 772962 answers and 150324 users. The experimental results reveal significant improvements over the baseline methods and validate the positive influence of topic-level information. Answering questions in a university's entrance examination like Gaokao in China challenges AI technology. As a preliminary attempt to take up this challenge, we focus on multiple-choice questions in Gaokao, and propose a three-stage approach that exploits and extends information retrieval techniques. Taking Wikipedia as the source of knowledge, our approach obtains knowledge relevant to a question by retrieving pages from Wikipedia via string matching and context-based disambiguation, and then ranks and filters pages using multiple strategies to draw critical evidence, based on which the truth of each option is assessed via relevance-based entailment. It achieves encouraging results on real-life questions in recent history tests, significantly outperforming baseline approaches. Extractive reading comprehension systems can often locate the correct answer to a question in a context document, but they also tend to make unreliable guesses on questions for which the correct answer is not stated in the context. Existing datasets either focus exclusively on answerable questions, or use automatically generated unanswerable questions that are easy to identify. To address these weaknesses, we present SQuAD 2.0, the latest version of the Stanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD). SQuAD 2.0 combines existing SQuAD data with over 50,000 unanswerable questions written adversarially by crowdworkers to look similar to answerable ones. To do well on SQuAD 2.0, systems must not only answer questions when possible, but also determine when no answer is supported by the paragraph and abstain from answering. SQuAD 2.0 is a challenging natural language understanding task for existing models: a strong neural system that gets 86 F1 on SQuAD 1.1 achieves only 66 F1 on SQuAD 2.0. When we write or prepare to write a research paper, we always have appropriate references in mind. However, there are most likely references we have missed and should have been read and cited. As such a good citation recommendation system would not only improve our paper but, overall, the efficiency and quality of literature search. Usually, a citation's context contains explicit words explaining the citation. Using this, we propose a method that "translates" research papers into references. By considering the citations and their contexts from existing papers as parallel data written in two different "languages", we adopt the translation model to create a relationship between these two "vocabularies". Experiments on both CiteSeer and CiteULike dataset show that our approach outperforms other baseline methods and increase the precision, recall and f-measure by at least 5 to 10 , respectively. In addition, our approach runs much faster in the both training and recommending stage, which proves the effectiveness and the scalability of our work.