The problem of spurious programs is a longstanding challenge when training a semantic parser from weak supervision. To eliminate such programs that have wrong semantics but correct denotation, existing methods focus on exploiting similarities between examples based on domain-specific knowledge. In this paper, we propose a domain-agnostic filtering mechanism based on program execution results. Specifically, for each program obtained through the search process, we first construct a representation that captures the program’s semantics as execution results under various inputs. Then, we run a majority vote on these representations to identify and filter out programs with significantly different semantics from the other programs. In particular, our method is orthogonal to the program search process so that it can easily augment any of the existing weakly supervised semantic parsing frameworks. Empirical evaluations on the Natural Language Visual Reasoning and WikiTableQuestions demonstrate that applying our method to the existing semantic parsers induces significantly improved performances.

Ambiguous questions persist in open-domain question answering, because formulating a precise question with a unique answer is often challenging. Previous works have tackled this issue by asking disambiguated questions for all possible interpretations of the ambiguous question. Instead, we propose to ask a clarification question, where the user’s response will help identify the interpretation that best aligns with the user’s intention. We first present CAmbigNQ, a dataset consisting of 5,653 ambiguous questions, each with relevant passages, possible answers, and a clarification question. The clarification questions were efficiently created by generating them using InstructGPT and manually revising them as necessary. We then define a pipeline of three tasks—(1) ambiguity detection, (2) clarification question generation, and (3) clarification-based QA. In the process, we adopt or design appropriate evaluation metrics to facilitate sound research. Lastly, we achieve F1 of 61.3, 25.1, and 40.5 on the three tasks, demonstrating the need for further improvements while providing competitive baselines for future work.