Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userHow to Evaluate Your Dialogue Models: A Review of Approaches
131
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Xinmeng Li
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Evaluating the quality of a dialogue system is an understudied problem. The recent evolution of evaluation method motivated this survey, in which an explicit and comprehensive analysis of the existing methods is sought. We are first to divide the evaluation methods into three classes, i.e., automatic evaluation, human-involved evaluation and user simulator based evaluation. Then, each class is covered with main features and the related evaluation metrics. The existence of benchmarks, suitable for the evaluation of dialogue techniques are also discussed in detail. Finally, some open issues are pointed out to bring the evaluation method into a new frontier.
rate research
Read More
Though generative dialogue modeling is widely seen as a language modeling task, the task demands an agent to have a complex natural language understanding of its input text to carry a meaningful interaction with an user. The automatic metrics used evaluate the quality of the generated text as a proxy to the holistic interaction of the agent. Such metrics were earlier shown to not correlate with the human judgement. In this work, we observe that human evaluation of dialogue agents can be inconclusive due to the lack of sufficient information for appropriate evaluation. The automatic metrics are deterministic yet shallow and human evaluation can be relevant yet inconclusive. To bridge this gap in evaluation, we propose designing a set of probing tasks to evaluate dialogue models. The hand-crafted tasks are aimed at quantitatively evaluating a generative dialogue models understanding beyond the token-level evaluation on the generated text. The probing tasks are deterministic like automatic metrics and requires human judgement in their designing; benefiting from the best of both worlds. With experiments on probe tasks we observe that, unlike RNN based architectures, transformer model may not be learning to comprehend the input text despite its generated text having higher overlap with the target text.
Diverse word representations have surged in most state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) applications. Nevertheless, how to efficiently evaluate such word embeddings in the informal domain such as Twitter or forums, remains an ongoing challenge due to the lack of sufficient evaluation dataset. We derived a large list of variant spelling pairs from UrbanDictionary with the automatic approaches of weakly-supervised pattern-based bootstrapping and self-training linear-chain conditional random field (CRF). With these extracted relation pairs we promote the odds of eliding the text normalization procedure of traditional NLP pipelines and directly adopting representations of non-standard words in the informal domain. Our code is available.
Energy-Based Models (EBMs), also known as non-normalized probabilistic models, specify probability density or mass functions up to an unknown normalizing constant. Unlike most other probabilistic models, EBMs do not place a restriction on the tractability of the normalizing constant, thus are more flexible to parameterize and can model a more expressive family of probability distributions. However, the unknown normalizing constant of EBMs makes training particularly difficult. Our goal is to provide a friendly introduction to modern approaches for EBM training. We start by explaining maximum likelihood training with Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC), and proceed to elaborate on MCMC-free approaches, including Score Matching (SM) and Noise Constrastive Estimation (NCE). We highlight theoretical connections among these three approaches, and end with a brief survey on alternative training methods, which are still under active research. Our tutorial is targeted at an audience with basic understanding of generative models who want to apply EBMs or start a research project in this direction.
Reading and writing research papers is one of the most privileged abilities that a qualified researcher should master. However, it is difficult for new researchers (eg{students}) to fully {grasp} this ability. It would be fascinating if we could train an intelligent agent to help people read and summarize papers, and perhaps even discover and exploit the potential knowledge clues to write novel papers. Although there have been existing works focusing on summarizing (emph{i.e.}, reading) the knowledge in a given text or generating (emph{i.e.}, writing) a text based on the given knowledge, the ability of simultaneously reading and writing is still under development. Typically, this requires an agent to fully understand the knowledge from the given text materials and generate correct and fluent novel paragraphs, which is very challenging in practice. In this paper, we propose a Deep ReAder-Writer (DRAW) network, which consists of a textit{Reader} that can extract knowledge graphs (KGs) from input paragraphs and discover potential knowledge, a graph-to-text textit{Writer} that generates a novel paragraph, and a textit{Reviewer} that reviews the generated paragraph from three different aspects. Extensive experiments show that our DRAW network outperforms considered baselines and several state-of-the-art methods on AGENDA and M-AGENDA datasets. Our code and supplementary are released at https://github.com/menggehe/DRAW.
Pretrained multilingual models (PMMs) enable zero-shot learning via cross-lingual transfer, performing best for languages seen during pretraining. While methods exist to improve performance for unseen languages, they have almost exclusively been evaluated using amounts of raw text only available for a small fraction of the worlds languages. In this paper, we evaluate the performance of existing methods to adapt PMMs to new languages using a resource available for over 1600 languages: the New Testament. This is challenging for two reasons: (1) the small corpus size, and (2) the narrow domain. While performance drops for all approaches, we surprisingly still see gains of up to $17.69%$ accuracy for part-of-speech tagging and $6.29$ F1 for NER on average over all languages as compared to XLM-R. Another unexpected finding is that continued pretraining, the simplest approach, performs best. Finally, we perform a case study to disentangle the effects of domain and size and to shed light on the influence of the finetuning source language.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
