Challenge: Standard language generation metrics have been shown to be ineffective for dialog evaluation.
Approach: They propose an unsupervised evaluation metric for dialog that trains unsupervised models to measure several desirable qualities of dialog.
Outcome: The proposed evaluation metric strongly correlates with human judgment on Topical-Chat and PersonaChat.

Similar Papers

Learning an Unreferenced Metric for Online Dialogue Evaluation (2020.acl-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing tools for dialogue evaluation do not generalize to unseen datasets and/or need a human-generated reference response during inference.
Approach: They propose an unreferenced automated dialogue evaluation metric that uses large pre-trained language models to extract latent representations of utterances and leverages the temporal transitions that exist between them.
Outcome: The proposed model achieves higher correlation with human annotations in an online setting, while not requiring true responses for comparison during inference.
What is wrong with you?: Leveraging User Sentiment for Automatic Dialog Evaluation (2022.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing metrics for dialog evaluation are trained on human annotations, which is cumbersome to collect.
Approach: They propose to use user sentiment and other information as proxy to measure the quality of previous dialogs.
Outcome: The proposed model is comparable to models trained on human annotated data.
REAM♯: An Enhancement Approach to Reference-based Evaluation Metrics for Open-domain Dialog Generation (2021.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing evaluation metrics for open-domain dialogue systems are limited by the diversity of possible outcomings.
Approach: They propose a method to augment a reference set to improve reliability . they propose BLEU to measure similarity between a predicted response and a small set of references .
Outcome: The proposed model improves the reliability of reference-based metrics with augmented reference sets.
xDial-Eval: A Multilingual Open-Domain Dialogue Evaluation Benchmark (2023.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Currently, human evaluation is the most reliable way to holistically judge the quality of the dialogue.
Approach: They propose to use English dialogue evaluation metrics to generalize them to other languages.
Outcome: The proposed metrics outperform OpenAI’s ChatGPT in terms of average Pearson correlations over all datasets and languages.
FineD-Eval: Fine-grained Automatic Dialogue-Level Evaluation (2022.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Recent model-based reference-free metrics for open-domain dialogue evaluation lack correlations with human judgment and poor interpretability.
Approach: They propose a multi-dimensional dialogue-level metric with three sub-metrics targeting a specific dimension.
Outcome: The proposed metric outperforms existing models and sub-metrics in three high-quality dialogue evaluation benchmarks.
Spurious Correlations in Reference-Free Evaluation of Text Generation (2022.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Recent work suggests that reference-free evaluation metrics may rely on spurious correlations with human judgments.
Approach: They propose to use model-based, reference-free evaluation metrics to evaluate natural language generation systems.
Outcome: The proposed metrics achieve high correlations with human judgments, but they may not be robust enough to evaluate their efficacy and robustness.
Deconstruct to Reconstruct a Configurable Evaluation Metric for Open-Domain Dialogue Systems (2020.coling-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing evaluation metrics are not designed to cope with this flexibility.
Approach: They propose to group the qualities into three groups to obtain a single metric called USL-H.
Outcome: The proposed metric achieves good correlations with human judgment and maintains its configurability towards different aspects and metrics.
Beyond User Self-Reported Likert Scale Ratings: A Comparison Model for Automatic Dialog Evaluation (2020.acl-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing automatic dialog evaluation metrics are mostly reference-based . Existing models that measure self-reported user ratings are biased and variance among different users.
Approach: They propose an automatic evaluation model that automatically cleans self-reported user ratings as it trains on them.
Outcome: The proposed model achieves 89.2% accuracy in the dialog comparison task.
CausalScore: An Automatic Reference-Free Metric for Assessing Response Relevance in Open-Domain Dialogue Systems (2025.coling-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing metrics for dialogue quality evaluation show low correlation with human judgements . current metrics do not accurately evaluate dialogue responses based on dialogue history .
Approach: They propose a new metric measuring causal strength between dialogue histories and responses . they collect a dialogue dataset with human-annotated causal relations and pairwise human judgements .
Outcome: The proposed metric outperforms existing state-of-the-art metrics in human judgements . it is based on a dialogue dataset with human-annotated causal relations and human judgement sets .
uBLEU: Uncertainty-Aware Automatic Evaluation Method for Open-Domain Dialogue Systems (2020.acl-srw)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing evaluation metrics for text generation tasks do not consider uncertain responses without writing additional reference responses by hand.
Approach: They propose a human-aided, uncertainty-aware evaluation method for open-domain dialogue systems, BLEU.
Outcome: The proposed method is comparable to existing methods on Twitter and improves state-of-the-art evaluation method RUBER.

What is GenGO?

GenGO is an NLP powered publication search system. It currenctly indexes 30k+ papers from ACL Anthology, and implements multi-aspect summarization, semantic search, and more!

Information

About
Limitations