Challenge: Question answering (QA) is a popular task, but we test both separately . a recent study found that LLMs are less accurate in numerical RQA than RQA .
Approach: We run 16 LLMs on QA and RQA with trivia questions/answers . they find question and answer types that lead to RQA errors and suggest improvements .
Outcome: The results show that LLMs are less accurate in RQA for numerical answers than RQA . RQA errors correlate with question difficulty and inversely correlate with answer frequencies .

Similar Papers

Which of These Best Describes Multiple Choice Evaluation with LLMs? A) Forced B) Flawed C) Fixable D) All of the Above (2025.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Multiple choice question answering (MCQA) is popular for LLM evaluation due to its simplicity and human-like testing.
Approach: They argue for a reform of multiple choice question answering (MCQA) they argue for more generative formats based on human testing .
Outcome: The proposed reforms improve the quality of MCQA, the authors argue . they show that even when MCQ is a useful format, its datasets suffer from leakage, unanswerability, shortcuts and saturation.
Bend but Don’t Break? Multi-Challenge Stress Test for QA Models (D19-58)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: a gap remains in reasoning ability compared to a human, and performance tends to degrade when models are exposed to less-constrained tasks.
Approach: They conduct extensive qualitative and quantitative analyses on the results of four models across four datasets . they relate common errors to model capabilities and discuss a way forward .
Outcome: The proposed model performance is based on the results of four models across four datasets.
Answering the Wrong Question: Reasoning Trace Inversion for Abstention in LLMs (2026.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Large Language Models have been shown to have worse abstention abilities than reasoning models . a new class of abstraction methods is developed to improve absttention performance .
Approach: They propose a class of abstention methods that generate reasoning trace and reconstruct most likely query from it.
Outcome: The proposed method beats baselines in 33 out of 36 settings.
PEDANTS: Cheap but Effective and Interpretable Answer Equivalence (2024.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Current short-form QA evaluations lack diverse styles of evaluation data and rely on expensive and slow LLMs.
Approach: They propose a rubric for machine QA that is more stable than an exact match and neural methods.
Outcome: The proposed evaluations improve on the existing short-form QA evaluations using the Trivia community.
ARC ‘Challenge’ Is Not That Challenging (2025.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: ARC Challenge appears to be more difficult than ARC Easy for modern LLMs due to an evaluation setup that prevents direct comparison of answer choices rather than inherent complexity.
Approach: They propose a setup where multiple choice problems are evaluated and the one with the highest likelihood is compared against the gold standard to determine accuracy.
Outcome: The proposed evaluation setup is more difficult than ARC Easy for modern LLMs because it prevents direct comparison of answer choices rather than inherent complexity.
Knowledge Corpus Error in Question Answering (2023.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Recent work in open-domain question answering (QA) has explored generating context passages from large language models (LLMs) however, it is not well understood why generated passages can be more effective than retrieved ones.
Approach: They propose to generate context passages from large language models by paraphrasing human-annotated gold context using LLMs to observe knowledge corpus error.
Outcome: The proposed framework shows that paraphrasing human-annotated gold contexts improves performance over retrieval steps.
NoiseQA: Challenge Set Evaluation for User-Centric Question Answering (2021.eacl-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Question-Answering (QA) systems are deployed in the real world . a lack of research attention has been devoted to studying the issues that arise when people use QA systems.
Approach: They show that component components that precede an answering engine can introduce varied and considerable sources of error.
Outcome: The proposed evaluations highlight the need for QA evaluation to expand to consider real-world use.
Table Question Answering in the Era of Large Language Models: A Comprehensive Survey of Tasks, Methods, and Evaluation (2026.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Table Question Answering (TQA) aims to answer natural language questions using tabular data.
Approach: They propose a systematic overview of TQA research using large language models and summarize available benchmarks based on task features.
Outcome: The proposed framework provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of the art in the field of Table Question Answering.
I Could’ve Asked That: Reformulating Unanswerable Questions (2024.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing large language models do not assist users in reformulating unanswerable questions . a recent study found that the models failed to reformulate questions based on assumptions that conflict with or cannot be verified with the information available in documents.
Approach: They evaluate open-source and proprietary LLMs on couldAsk to evaluate their performance . they found that GPT-4 and Llama2-7B successfully reformulate questions only 26% and 12% of the time .
Outcome: The proposed model successfully reformulates questions only 26% and 12% of the time . the proposed model is not able to reformulate questions, but it can be improved .
Can LLMs Learn From Mistakes? An Empirical Study on Reasoning Tasks (2024.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing work has shown that simple learning can enhance the chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning of large language models.
Approach: They construct mistake-correction datasets to identify and correct mistakes in CoTs . they conclude that LLMs can learn from mistakes to enhance their CoT reasoning .
Outcome: The proposed datasets show that LLMs can learn from mistakes to enhance their CoT reasoning performance.

What is GenGO?

GenGO is an NLP powered publication search system. It currenctly indexes 30k+ papers from ACL Anthology, and implements multi-aspect summarization, semantic search, and more!

Information

About
Limitations