Learning to Retrieve Reasoning Paths over Wikipedia Graph for Question Answering
Answering questions that require multi-hop reasoning at web-scale necessitates retrieving multiple evidence documents, one of which often has little lexical or semantic relationship to the question. This paper introduces a new graphbased recurrent retrieval approach that learns to retrieve reasoning paths over the Wikipedia graph to answer multi-hop open-domain questions. Our retriever model trains a recurrent neural network that learns to sequentially retrieve evidence paragraphs in the reasoning path by conditioning on the previously retrieved documents. Our reader model ranks the reasoning paths and extracts the answer span included in the best reasoning path. Experimental results show state-of-the-art results in three open-domain QA datasets, showcasing the effectiveness and robustness of our method. Notably, our method achieves significant improvement in HotpotQA, outperforming the previous best model by more than 14 points.1
Introduction. Open-domain Question Answering (QA) is the task of answering a question given a large collection of text documents (e.g., Wikipedia). Most state-of-the-art approaches for open-domain QA (Chen et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2018a; Lee et al., 2018; Yang et al., 2019) leverage non-parameterized models (e.g., TF-IDF or BM25) to retrieve a fixed set of documents, where an answer span is extracted by a neural reading comprehension model. Despite the success of these pipeline methods in singlehop QA, whose questions can be answered based on a single paragraph, they often fail to retrieve the required evidence for answering multi-hop questions, e.g., the question in Figure 1. Multi-hop QA (Yang et al., 2018) usually requires finding more than one evidence document, one of which often consists of little lexical overlap or semantic relationship to the original question. However, retrieving a fixed list of documents independently does not capture relationships between evidence documents through bridge entities that are required for multi-hop reasoning.
Discussion / Conclusion. This paper introduces a new graph-based recurrent retrieval approach, which retrieves reasoning paths over the Wikipedia graph to answer multi-hop open-domain questions. Our retriever model learns to sequentially retrieve evidence paragraphs to form the reasoning path. Subsequently, our reader model re-ranks the reasoning paths, and it determines the final answer as the one extracted from the best reasoning path. Our experimental results significantly advance the state of the art on HotpotQA by more than 14 points absolute gain on the full wiki setting. Our approach also achieves the state-of-the-art performance on SQuAD Open and Natural Questions Open without any architectural changes, demonstrating the robustness of our method. Our method provides insights into the underlying entity relationships, and the discrete reasoning paths are helpful in interpreting our framework’s reasoning process. Future work involves end-to-end training of our graph-based recurrent retriever and reader for improving upon our current two-stage training.
Lines of inquiry this paper opens 24
Research framings built by reading the notes related to this paper — the questions it feeds into.
What graph topologies best support reasoning and model generalization? Can structured graphs outperform embeddings for complex relational queries?- How does structure-aware retrieval routing differ from existing graph-versus-vector RAG tradeoffs?
- Can knowledge graph structure help embeddings represent more combinations?
- How should enterprises choose between graph and vector approaches for RAG?
- How does hypergraph accumulation differ from single-pass graph retrieval?
- How does knowledge graph structure enable multi-hop reasoning in recommendations?
- When should you use knowledge graphs instead of semantic vector retrieval systems?
- Can graph-based retrieval with knowledge graphs scale to multi-hop reasoning?
- How can knowledge graphs improve over pure embedding retrieval?
- Can knowledge graph structure be exploited for efficient multi-hop retrieval?
- Why does community detection in knowledge graphs outperform pure retrieval or pure summarization?
- How do community-based summaries differ from retrieval-based traversal in knowledge graph RAG?
- How does map-reduce over communities compare to flat multi-hop retrieval architectures?
- Can inference-time query decomposition replace pre-built knowledge graph structures?
- How does GraphRAG differ from HippoRAG despite both using knowledge graphs?
- Can query-time logic graphs match the efficiency of pre-built knowledge graph indexing?
- How do hierarchical research architectures improve multi-hop query accuracy?