In this task, you will be presented with a context from an academic paper and a question separated with a 
. You have to answer the question based on the context.

To overcome the above-mentioned challenges, we propose a locally-linear meta-embedding learning method that (a) requires only the words in the vocabulary of each source embedding, without having to predict embeddings for missing words, (b) can meta-embed source embeddings with different dimensionalities, (c) is sensitive to the diversity of the neighbourhoods of the source embeddings.

Our proposed method comprises of two steps: a neighbourhood reconstruction step (Section "Nearest Neighbour Reconstruction" ), and a projection step (Section "Projection to Meta-Embedding Space" ). In the reconstruction step, we represent the embedding of a word by the linearly weighted combination of the embeddings of its nearest neighbours in each source embedding space. 
 Question: What is the introduced meta-embedding method introduced in this paper?
proposed method comprises of two steps: a neighbourhood reconstruction step (Section "Nearest Neighbour Reconstruction" ), and a projection step (Section "Projection to Meta-Embedding Space" ). In the reconstruction step, we represent the embedding of a word by the linearly weighted combination of the embeddings of its nearest neighbours in each source embedding space. 

Results show that the CJFA encoder obtains significantly better phone classification accuracy than the VAE baseline and also than the CJFS encoder. These results are replicated for speaker recognition tasks. 
 Question: Which approach out of two proposed in the paper performed better in experiments?
CJFA encoder 

Experiments ::: Baselines
For comparison, we select several public models as baselines including semantic parsing models: BiDAF BIBREF3, an MRC model which utilizes a bi-directional attention flow network to encode the question and passage;

QANet BIBREF12, which utilizes convolutions and self-attentions as the building blocks of encoders to represent the question and passage;

BERT BIBREF23, a pre-trained bidirectional Transformer-based language model which achieves state-of-the-art performance on lots of public MRC datasets recently;

and numerical MRC models: NAQANet BIBREF6, a numerical version of QANet model.

NAQANet+, an enhanced version of NAQANet implemented by ourselves, which further considers real number (e.g. “2.5”), richer arithmetic expression, data augmentation, etc. Syn Dep BIBREF6, the neural semantic parsing model (KDG) BIBREF22 with Stanford dependencies based sentence representations;

OpenIE BIBREF6, KDG with open information extraction based sentence representations;

SRL BIBREF6, KDG with semantic role labeling based sentence representations;

and traditional MRC models: 
 Question: what are the existing models they compared with?

Syn Dep OpenIE SRL BiDAF QANet BERT NAQANet NAQANet+

