Neural generative dialogue agents have shown an increasing ability to hold short chitchat conversations, when evaluated by crowdworkers in controlled settings. However, their performance in real-life deployment -- talking to intrinsically-motivated u
sers in noisy environments -- is less well-explored. In this paper, we perform a detailed case study of a neural generative model deployed as part of Chirpy Cardinal, an Alexa Prize socialbot. We find that unclear user utterances are a major source of generative errors such as ignoring, hallucination, unclearness and repetition. However, even in unambiguous contexts the model frequently makes reasoning errors. Though users express dissatisfaction in correlation with these errors, certain dissatisfaction types (such as offensiveness and privacy objections) depend on additional factors -- such as the user's personal attitudes, and prior unaddressed dissatisfaction in the conversation. Finally, we show that dissatisfied user utterances can be used as a semi-supervised learning signal to improve the dialogue system. We train a model to predict next-turn dissatisfaction, and show through human evaluation that as a ranking function, it selects higher-quality neural-generated utterances.
