论文标题
不和谐问题:新闻报道中多样性分析的计算方法
Discord Questions: A Computational Approach To Diversity Analysis in News Coverage
论文作者
论文摘要
新闻读者可以访问各种来源,这有许多潜在的好处。现代新闻集合商在组织新闻方面做了一项艰苦的工作,为读者提供了众多的来源选择,但是选择阅读的来源仍然具有挑战性。我们提出了一个新的框架,以帮助读者识别来源差异并了解新闻报道多样性。该框架基于一系列不和谐问题:具有多样化答案池的问题,明确说明了来源差异。 To assemble a prototype of the framework, we focus on two components: (1) discord question generation, the task of generating questions answered differently by sources, for which we propose an automatic scoring method, and create a model that improves performance from current question generation (QG) methods by 5%, (2) answer consolidation, the task of grouping answers to a question that are semantically similar, for which we collect data and repurpose a method that achieves在我们现实的测试集上,81%的平衡精度。我们通过原型接口说明了框架的可行性。尽管Discord QG的模型性能仍然落后于人类绩效超过15%,但判断出的问题比Factoid问题更有趣,并且可以揭示新闻报道中的细节,情感和来源推理的差异。
There are many potential benefits to news readers accessing diverse sources. Modern news aggregators do the hard work of organizing the news, offering readers a plethora of source options, but choosing which source to read remains challenging. We propose a new framework to assist readers in identifying source differences and gaining an understanding of news coverage diversity. The framework is based on the generation of Discord Questions: questions with a diverse answer pool, explicitly illustrating source differences. To assemble a prototype of the framework, we focus on two components: (1) discord question generation, the task of generating questions answered differently by sources, for which we propose an automatic scoring method, and create a model that improves performance from current question generation (QG) methods by 5%, (2) answer consolidation, the task of grouping answers to a question that are semantically similar, for which we collect data and repurpose a method that achieves 81% balanced accuracy on our realistic test set. We illustrate the framework's feasibility through a prototype interface. Even though model performance at discord QG still lags human performance by more than 15%, generated questions are judged to be more interesting than factoid questions and can reveal differences in the level of detail, sentiment, and reasoning of sources in news coverage.