Beyond Relevance: Trustworthy Answer Selection via Consensus Verification

Community Question Answering (CQA) sites such as Yahoo! Answers and Baidu Knows have emerged as rich knowledge resources for information seekers. However, answers posted to CQA sites often vary a lot in their qualities. User votes from the community may partially reflect the overall quality of the answer, but they are often missing. Hence, automatic selection of "good'' answers becomes a practical research problem that will help us manage the quality of accumulated knowledge. Without loss of generality, a good answer should deliver not only relevant but also trustworthy information that can help resolve the information needs of the posted question, but the latter has received less investigation in the past. In this paper, we propose a novel matching-verification framework for automatic answer selection. The matching component assesses the relevance of a candidate answer to a given question as conventional QA methods. The major enhancement is the verification component, which aims to leverage the wisdom of crowds, e.g., some big information repository, for trustworthiness measurement. Given a question, we take the top retrieved results from the information repository as the supporting evidences to distill the consensus representation. A major challenge is that there is no guarantee that one can always obtain reliable consensus from the wisdom of crowds for a question due to the noisy nature and the limitation of the existing search technology.Therefore, we decompose the trustworthiness measurement into two parts, i.e., a verification score which measures the consistency between a candidate answer and the consensus representation, and a confidence score which measures the reliability of the consensus itself. Empirical studies on three real-world CQA data collections, i.e. YahooQA, QuoraQA and AmazonQA, show that our approach can significantly outperform the state-of-the-art methods on the answer selection task.