We use a few cookies

Essential cookies keep the library working. With your permission, we'd also like to use analytics to see what's useful and improve the experience. Read our Privacy Policy or Cookie Policy.

Skip to main content
Home/e-Resources/Arts & Humanities/History for Visual Dialog: Do we really need it?
Conference ProceedingsArts & Humanities

History for Visual Dialog: Do we really need it?

2020

Checking your access to this record.

Abstract & Overview

Visual Dialog involves "understanding" the dialog history (what has been discussed previously) and the current question (what is asked), in addition to grounding information in the image, to generate the correct response.In this paper, we show that co-attention models which explicitly encode dialog history outperform models that don't, achieving state-ofthe-art performance (72 % NDCG on val set).However, we also expose shortcomings of the crowd-sourcing dataset collection procedure by showing that history is indeed only required for a small amount of the data and that the current evaluation metric encourages generic replies.To that end, we propose a challenging subset (VisDialConv) of the VisDial val set and provide a benchmark of 63% NDCG.

Cite this record

Shubham Agarwal, Trung Bui, Joon‐Young Lee, Ioannis Konstas, Verena Rieser (2020). History for Visual Dialog: Do we really need it?. Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.728

Copy in another style

Agarwal, S., Bui, T., Lee, J., Konstas, I., & Rieser, V. (2020). History for Visual Dialog: Do we really need it? Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.728
Author names are used as deposited, so check their order before you submit.

Metadata is harvested from open-access indexes and can be incomplete. Check a citation against the published version before relying on it — see our open access & attribution policy.