Search results

This paper aims to make it convenient for those who have only just begun their research into Community Question Answering (CQA) expert recommendation, and for those who are already concerned with this issue, to ease the extension of our understanding with future research.

In this paper, keywords such as “CQA”, “Social Question Answering”, “expert recommendation”, “question routing” and “expert finding” are used to search major digital libraries. The final sample includes a list of 83 relevant articles authored in academia as well as industry that have been published from January 1, 2008 to March 1, 2019.

This study proposes a comprehensive framework to categorize extant studies into three broad areas of CQA expert recommendation research: understanding profile modeling, recommendation approaches and recommendation system impacts.

This paper focuses on discussing and sorting out the key research issues from these three research genres. Finally, it was found that conflicting and contradictory research results and research gaps in the existing research, and then put forward the urgent research topics.

Community question answering (CQA) websites provide an open and free way to share knowledge about general topics on the internet. However, inquirers may not obtain useful answers and those who are qualified to provide answers may also miss opportunities to share their expertise without any notice. To address this problem, the purpose of this paper is to provide the means for inquirers to access archived answers and to identify effective subject matter experts for target questions.

This paper presents a question answering promoter, called QAP, for the CQA services. The proposed QAP facilitates the use of filtered archived answers regarded as explicit knowledge and recommended experts regarded as sources of implicit knowledge for the given target questions.

The experimental results indicate that QAP can leverage knowledge sharing by refining archived answers upon creditability and distributing raised questions to qualified potential experts.

This proposed method is designed for the traditional Chinese corpus.

This paper proposed an integrated framework of answer selection and expert finding uses the bottom-up multipath evaluation algorithm, an underlying voting model, the agglomerative hierarchical clustering technique and feature approaches of answer trustworthiness measuring, identification of satisfied learners and credibility of repliers. The experiments using the corpus crawled from Yahoo! Knowledge Plus under designed scenarios are conducted and results are shown in fine details.

Intent detection and slot filling are two important tasks in question comprehension of a question answering system. This study aims to build a joint task model with some generalization ability and benchmark its performance over other neural network models mentioned in this paper.

This study used a deep-learning-based approach for the joint modeling of question intent detection and slot filling. Meanwhile, the internal cell structure of the long short-term memory (LSTM) network was improved. Furthermore, the dataset Computer Science Literature Question (CSLQ) was constructed based on the Science and Technology Knowledge Graph. The datasets Airline Travel Information Systems, Snips (a natural language processing dataset of the consumer intent engine collected by Snips) and CSLQ were used for the empirical analysis. The accuracy of intent detection and F1 score of slot filling, as well as the semantic accuracy of sentences, were compared for several models.

The results showed that the proposed model outperformed all other benchmark methods, especially for the CSLQ dataset. This proves that the design of this study improved the comprehensive performance and generalization ability of the model to some extent.

This study contributes to the understanding of question sentences in a specific domain. LSTM was improved, and a computer literature domain dataset was constructed herein. This will lay the data and model foundation for the future construction of a computer literature question answering system.

The objective of this paper is to propose a holistic dynamic model for understanding the behavior of a complex and internet‐based kind of knowledge market by considering both social and economic interactions.

A system dynamics (SD) model is formulated in this study to investigate the dynamic characteristics of complex interactions in a fee‐based online question & answer (Q&A) knowledge market. The proposed model considers the dynamic, non‐linear, asymmetric, and reciprocal relationships between its components, and allows the study of the evolution of the market under assumed conditions.

Some illustrative results show that: this market is very sensitive to the prices that the customers choose; low‐priced questions are as important as high‐priced ones; gradually increasing experts' proportion of a question's price reduces customer satisfaction and experts' reputation; and training programs for experts result in higher customer satisfaction and researchers' reputation. Furthermore, three types of customers are identified and discussed.

This model can be used to change, manage, and control this market and also helps to design new similar markets. In addition, the proposed model helps to observe the behavior of a market under one or more policies before applying to the real world.

Since GA was shut down in 2006, the implications of this research serve as a strategic tool (strategic evaluation software) for understanding and examining the effects of policies for many existing similar Q&A business models. Furthermore, the SD approach can provide new insights into the field of online Q&A knowledge markets and overcome traditional econometric treatment of data for understanding the dynamic behavior of these markets.

Understanding the complex social and economic behavior of Q&A markets is one of the most important concerns for academics and practitioners in the areas of online markets' management. The paper shows how SD can provide attractive insights into the field of online fee‐based knowledge markets based on a qualitative and quantitative modeling. However, the background literature lacks a holistic view of these kinds of markets.

This paper aims to explore question and answer (Q&A) participation and behavioral patterns on academic social networking sites (ASNSs) from the perspective of multiple subjects such as academic, corporate and government institutions.

Focused on the Q&A service of ASNSs, this study chooses ResearchGate (RG) as the target ASNS and collects a large-scale data set from it, involving a sample of users and a Q&A sample about academic, corporate and government institutions. First, it studies the law of Q&A participation and the distribution of the type of user according to the sample of users. Second, it compares question-asking behavior and question-answering behavior stimulated by questions among the three types of institutions based on the Q&A sample. Finally, it discusses the Q&A participation and behavioral patterns of the three types of institutions in academic Q&A exchanges with full consideration of institutional attributes, and provides some suggestions for institutions and ASNSs.

The results show that these three types of institutions generally have a low level of participation in the Q&A service of RG, and the numbers of questions and answers proposed by institutional users conform to the power-law distribution. There are differences in Q&A participation and Q&A behavioral patterns among academic, corporate and government institutions. Government and academic institutions have more users participating in the Q&A service and their users are more willing to ask questions, while corporate institutions have fewer users who participate in the Q&A service and their users are inclined to provide answers. Questions from corporate institutions attract much more attention than those from the other two types of institutions.

This study reveals and compares the Q&A participation and the behavioral patterns of the three types of institutions in academic Q&A, thus deepening the understanding of the attributes of institutions in the academic information exchange context. In practice, the results can help guide different institutions to use the Q&A service of ASNSs more effectively and help ASNSs to better optimize their Q&A service.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate Google question-answering (QA) quality.

Given the large variety and complexity of Google answer boxes in search result pages, existing evaluation criteria for both search engines and QA systems seemed unsuitable. This study developed an evaluation criteria system for the evaluation of Google QA quality by coding and analyzing search results of questions from a representative question set. The study then evaluated Google’s overall QA quality as well as QA quality across four target types and across six question types, using the newly developed criteria system. ANOVA and Tukey tests were used to compare QA quality among different target types and question types.

It was found that Google provided significantly higher-quality answers to person-related questions than to thing-related, event-related and organization-related questions. Google also provided significantly higher-quality answers to where- questions than to who-, what- and how-questions. The more specific a question is, the higher the QA quality would be.

Suggestions for both search engine users and designers are presented to help enhance user experience and QA quality.

Particularly suitable for search engine QA quality analysis, the newly developed evaluation criteria system expanded and enriched assessment metrics of both search engines and QA systems.

This paper seeks to evaluate to what extent Google retrieved correct answers to queries inferred from factual and topical requests in a digital Ask‐a‐Librarian service.

In total, 100 factual and 100 topical questions were picked from a digital reference service run by public libraries. The inferred queries simulated average web queries. They were expressed as separate keywords and as questions. The top ten retrieval results were observed for each answer. The inspection was stopped when the first correct answer was identified.

Google retrieved correct answers to 42 percent of the topical questions and 29 percent of factual questions by keyword queries. The performance of queries in question form was considerably weaker. The results concerning the characteristics of queries and retrieval effectiveness are also presented. Evaluations indicate that the public library reference services answered at least 55 percent of the questions correctly. Thus Google did not outperform the Ask‐a‐Librarian service.

The study introduces a new way of evaluating search engines by comparing their performance with other related services such as an Ask‐a‐Librarian service.

Question-answering (QA) systems are being increasingly applied in learning contexts. However, the authors’ understanding of the relationship between such tools and traditional QA channels remains limited. Focusing on question-answering learning activities, the current research investigates the effect of QA systems on students' learning processes and outcomes, as well as the interplay between two QA channels, that is, QA systems and communication with instructors.

The authors designed and implemented a QA system for two university courses, and collected data from questionnaires and system logs that recorded the interaction between students and the system throughout a semester.

The results show that using a QA system alone does not improve students' learning processes or outcomes. However, the use of a QA system significantly improves the positive effect of instructor communication.

This study contributes to the literature on learning and education technology, and provides practical guidance on how to incorporate QA tools in learning.

The purpose of this study is to examine the predictors of high‐quality answers in a community‐driven question answering service (Yahoo! Answers).

The identified predictors were organised into two categories: social and content features. Social features refer to the community aspects of the users and are extracted from explicit user interaction and feedback. Content features refer to the intrinsic and extrinsic content quality of answers that could be used to select the high‐quality answers. In total the framework built in this study comprises 17 features from two categories. Based on a randomly selected dataset of 1,600 question‐answer pairs from Yahoo! Answers, high‐quality answer predictors were identified.

The results of the analysis showed the importance of content appraisal features over social and textual content features. The features identified as strongly associated with high‐quality answers include positive votes, completeness, presentation, reliability and accuracy. Features weakly associated with high‐quality answers were high frequency words, answer length, and best answers answered. Features related to the asker's user history were found not to be associated with high‐quality answers.

This work could help in the reuse of answers for new questions. The study identified features that most influence the selection of high‐quality answers. Hence they could be used to select high‐quality answers for answering similar questions posed by users in the future. When a new question is posed, similar questions are first identified, and the answers for these questions are extracted and routed to the proposed quality framework for identifying high‐quality answers. Based on the overall quality index computed, the high‐quality answer could be returned to the asker.

Previous studies in identifying high‐quality answers were conducted using either of two approaches. First using social and textual content features found in community‐driven question answering services and second using content appraisal features by thorough assessment of answer quality provided by experts. However no study had integrated both approaches. Hence this study addresses this gap by developing an integrated generalisable framework to identify features that influence high‐quality answers.