File size: 2,582 Bytes
3e54ddc |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 |
# HEAD-QA
### Paper
HEAD-QA: A Healthcare Dataset for Complex Reasoning
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1906.04701.pdf
HEAD-QA is a multi-choice HEAlthcare Dataset. The questions come from exams to access a specialized position in the
Spanish healthcare system, and are challenging even for highly specialized humans. They are designed by the Ministerio
de Sanidad, Consumo y Bienestar Social.
The dataset contains questions about the following topics: medicine, nursing, psychology, chemistry, pharmacology and biology.
Homepage: https://aghie.github.io/head-qa/
### Citation
```
@inproceedings{vilares-gomez-rodriguez-2019-head,
title = "{HEAD}-{QA}: A Healthcare Dataset for Complex Reasoning",
author = "Vilares, David and
G{\'o}mez-Rodr{\'i}guez, Carlos",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
month = jul,
year = "2019",
address = "Florence, Italy",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P19-1092",
doi = "10.18653/v1/P19-1092",
pages = "960--966",
abstract = "We present HEAD-QA, a multi-choice question answering testbed to encourage research on complex reasoning. The questions come from exams to access a specialized position in the Spanish healthcare system, and are challenging even for highly specialized humans. We then consider monolingual (Spanish) and cross-lingual (to English) experiments with information retrieval and neural techniques. We show that: (i) HEAD-QA challenges current methods, and (ii) the results lag well behind human performance, demonstrating its usefulness as a benchmark for future work.",
}
```
### Groups and Tasks
#### Groups
- `headqa`: Evaluates `headqa_en` and `headqa_es`
#### Tasks
* `headqa_en` - English variant of HEAD-QA
* `headqa_es` - Spanish variant of HEAD-QA
### Checklist
* [x] Is the task an existing benchmark in the literature?
* [ ] Have you referenced the original paper that introduced the task?
* [ ] If yes, does the original paper provide a reference implementation? If so, have you checked against the reference implementation and documented how to run such a test?
If other tasks on this dataset are already supported:
* [x] Is the "Main" variant of this task clearly denoted?
* [x] Have you provided a short sentence in a README on what each new variant adds / evaluates?
* [ ] Have you noted which, if any, published evaluation setups are matched by this variant?\
* [x] Same as LM Evaluation Harness v0.3.0 implementation
|