We study Attributed Question Answering (abbr., AQA), a newly-released long-form answer generation task. The tailored and efficient training programmes haven’t yet been leveraged to strengthen AQA models. This hinders the simultaneous enhancement of their essential capabilities, including evidence identification, cross-source relation recognition and anti-distraction reasoning. To address the issue, we propose a tailored progressive curriculum learning approach, and use it to optimize both encoder-decoder and decoder-only AQA models. Experiments on the benchmark QuoteSum show that our approach yields substantial improvements and enables the AQA performance to reach 73.9% Sem-F1 score.

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) serves as a critical emerging ability in LLMs, especially when it comes to logical reasoning. Attempts have been made to induce such ability in small models as well by distilling from the data with CoT generated by Large Language Models (LLMs). However, existing methods often simply generate and incorporate more data from LLMs and fail to note the importance of efficiently utilizing existing CoT data. We here propose a new training paradigm AS-ES (Abstractive Segments - Extractive Segments) learning, which exploits the inherent information in CoT for iterative generation. Experiments show that our methods surpass the direct seq2seq training on CoT-extensive tasks like MWP and PET summarization, without data augmentation or altering the model itself. Furthermore, we explore the reason behind the inefficiency of small models in learning CoT and provide an explanation of why AS-ES learning works, giving insights into the underlying mechanism of CoT.

Explaining black-box model behavior with natural language has achieved impressive results in various NLP tasks. Recent research has explored the utilization of subsequences from the input text as a rationale, providing users with evidence to support the model decision. Although existing frameworks excel in generating high-quality rationales while achieving high task performance, they neglect to account for the unreliable link between the generated rationale and model decision. In simpler terms, a model may make correct decisions while attributing wrong rationales, or make poor decisions while attributing correct rationales. To mitigate this issue, we propose a unified two-stage framework known as Self-Attribution and Decision-Making (SADM). Through extensive experiments on five reasoning datasets from the ERASER benchmark, we demonstrate that our framework not only establishes a more reliable link between the generated rationale and model decision but also achieves competitive results in task performance and the quality of rationale. Furthermore, we explore the potential of our framework in semi-supervised scenarios.