Answering POI-recommendation Questions using Tourism Reviews

Danish Contractor, Krunal Shah, Aditi Partap, Parag Singla, Mausam Mausam
{"title":"Answering POI-recommendation Questions using Tourism Reviews","authors":"Danish Contractor, Krunal Shah, Aditi Partap, Parag Singla, Mausam Mausam","doi":"10.1145/3459637.3482320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We introduce the novel and challenging task of answering Points-of-interest (POI) recommendation questions, using a collection of reviews that describe candidate answer entities (POIs). We harvest a QA dataset that contains 47,124 paragraph-sized user questions from travelers seeking POI recommendations for hotels, attractions and restaurants. Each question can have thousands of candidate entities to choose from and each candidate is associated with a collection of unstructured reviews. Questions can include requirements based on physical location, budget, timings as well as other subjective considerations related to ambience, quality of service etc. Our dataset requires reasoning over a large number of candidate answer entities (over 5300 per question on average) and we find that running commonly used neural architectures for QA is prohibitively expensive. Further, commonly used retriever-ranker based methods also do not work well for our task due to the nature of review-documents. Thus, as a first attempt at addressing some of the novel challenges of reasoning-at-scale posed by our task, we present a task specific baseline model that uses a three-stage cluster-select-rerank architecture. The model first clusters text for each entity to identify exemplar sentences describing an entity. It then uses a neural information retrieval (IR) module to select a set of potential entities from the large candidate set. A reranker uses a deeper attention-based architecture to pick the best answers from the selected entities. This strategy performs better than a pure retrieval or a pure attention-based reasoning approach yielding nearly 25% relative improvement in Hits@3 over both approaches. To the best of our knowledge we are the first to present an unstructured QA-style task for POI-recommendation, using real-world tourism questions and POI-reviews.","PeriodicalId":405296,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3459637.3482320","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

We introduce the novel and challenging task of answering Points-of-interest (POI) recommendation questions, using a collection of reviews that describe candidate answer entities (POIs). We harvest a QA dataset that contains 47,124 paragraph-sized user questions from travelers seeking POI recommendations for hotels, attractions and restaurants. Each question can have thousands of candidate entities to choose from and each candidate is associated with a collection of unstructured reviews. Questions can include requirements based on physical location, budget, timings as well as other subjective considerations related to ambience, quality of service etc. Our dataset requires reasoning over a large number of candidate answer entities (over 5300 per question on average) and we find that running commonly used neural architectures for QA is prohibitively expensive. Further, commonly used retriever-ranker based methods also do not work well for our task due to the nature of review-documents. Thus, as a first attempt at addressing some of the novel challenges of reasoning-at-scale posed by our task, we present a task specific baseline model that uses a three-stage cluster-select-rerank architecture. The model first clusters text for each entity to identify exemplar sentences describing an entity. It then uses a neural information retrieval (IR) module to select a set of potential entities from the large candidate set. A reranker uses a deeper attention-based architecture to pick the best answers from the selected entities. This strategy performs better than a pure retrieval or a pure attention-based reasoning approach yielding nearly 25% relative improvement in Hits@3 over both approaches. To the best of our knowledge we are the first to present an unstructured QA-style task for POI-recommendation, using real-world tourism questions and POI-reviews.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用旅游评论回答poi推荐问题
我们介绍了回答兴趣点(POI)推荐问题的新颖且具有挑战性的任务,使用描述候选答案实体(POI)的评论集合。我们收集了一个QA数据集,其中包含47124个段落大小的用户问题,这些问题来自寻求酒店、景点和餐馆POI建议的旅行者。每个问题可以有数千个候选实体可供选择,每个候选实体都与一组非结构化评论相关联。问题可以包括基于物理位置、预算、时间以及与环境、服务质量等相关的其他主观考虑的要求。我们的数据集需要对大量的候选答案实体(平均每个问题超过5300个)进行推理,我们发现为QA运行常用的神经架构是非常昂贵的。此外,由于审查文档的性质,常用的基于检索者排名的方法也不能很好地用于我们的任务。因此,作为解决我们的任务所带来的一些大规模推理的新挑战的第一次尝试,我们提出了一个特定于任务的基线模型,该模型使用三阶段集群-选择-重新排序架构。该模型首先对每个实体的文本进行聚类,以识别描述实体的范例句子。然后使用神经信息检索(IR)模块从大候选集中选择一组潜在实体。重新排序器使用更深层次的基于注意力的体系结构从选定的实体中选择最佳答案。该策略比纯检索或纯基于注意力的推理方法性能更好,在Hits@3上比这两种方法都有近25%的相对改进。据我们所知,我们是第一个使用真实世界的旅游问题和poi评论为poi推荐提出非结构化qa式任务的人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
UltraGCN Fine and Coarse Granular Argument Classification before Clustering CHASE Crawler Detection in Location-Based Services Using Attributed Action Net Failure Prediction for Large-scale Water Pipe Networks Using GNN and Temporal Failure Series
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1