اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدTime to Transfer: Predicting and Evaluating Machine-Human Chatting Handoff
126
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Is chatbot able to completely replace the human agent? The short answer could be - it depends.... For some challenging cases, e.g., dialogues topical spectrum spreads beyond the training corpus coverage, the chatbot may malfunction and return unsatisfied utterances. This problem can be addressed by introducing the Machine-Human Chatting Handoff (MHCH), which enables human-algorithm collaboration. To detect the normal/transferable utterances, we propose a Difficulty-Assisted Matching Inference (DAMI) network, utilizing difficulty-assisted encoding to enhance the representations of utterances. Moreover, a matching inference mechanism is introduced to capture the contextual matching features. A new evaluation metric, Golden Transfer within Tolerance (GT-T), is proposed to assess the performance by considering the tolerance property of the MHCH. To provide insights into the task and validate the proposed model, we collect two new datasets. Extensive experimental results are presented and contrasted against a series of baseline models to demonstrate the efficacy of our model on MHCH.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
Two main approaches for evaluating the quality of machine-generated rationales are: 1) using human rationales as a gold standard; and 2) automated metrics based on how rationales affect model behavior. An open question, however, is how human rational
es fare with these automatic metrics. Analyzing a variety of datasets and models, we find that human rationales do not necessarily perform well on these metrics. To unpack this finding, we propose improved metrics to account for model-dependent baseline performance. We then propose two methods to further characterize rationale quality, one based on model retraining and one on using fidelity curves to reveal properties such as irrelevance and redundancy. Our work leads to actionable suggestions for evaluating and characterizing rationales.
In recent years, large neural networks for natural language generation (NLG) have made leaps and bounds in their ability to generate fluent text. However, the tasks of evaluating quality differences between NLG systems and understanding how humans pe
rceive the generated text remain both crucial and difficult. In this system demonstration, we present Real or Fake Text (RoFT), a website that tackles both of these challenges by inviting users to try their hand at detecting machine-generated text in a variety of domains. We introduce a novel evaluation task based on detecting the boundary at which a text passage that starts off human-written transitions to being machine-generated. We show preliminary results of using RoFT to evaluate detection of machine-generated news articles.
The premise of manual keyphrase annotation is to read the corresponding content of an annotated object. Intuitively, when we read, more important words will occupy a longer reading time. Hence, by leveraging human reading time, we can find the salien
t words in the corresponding content. However, previous studies on keyphrase extraction ignore human reading features. In this article, we aim to leverage human reading time to extract keyphrases from microblog posts. There are two main tasks in this study. One is to determine how to measure the time spent by a human on reading a word. We use eye fixation durations extracted from an open source eye-tracking corpus (OSEC). Moreover, we propose strategies to make eye fixation duration more effective on keyphrase extraction. The other task is to determine how to integrate human reading time into keyphrase extraction models. We propose two novel neural network models. The first is a model in which the human reading time is used as the ground truth of the attention mechanism. In the second model, we use human reading time as the external feature. Quantitative and qualitative experiments show that our proposed models yield better performance than the baseline models on two microblog datasets.
Behavioral decision theories aim to explain human behavior. Can they help predict it? An open tournament for prediction of human choices in fundamental economic decision tasks is presented. The results suggest that integration of certain behavioral t
heories as features in machine learning systems provides the best predictions. Surprisingly, the most useful theories for prediction build on basic properties of human and animal learning and are very different from mainstream decision theories that focus on deviations from rational choice. Moreover, we find that theoretical features should be based not only on qualitative behavioral insights (e.g. loss aversion), but also on quantitative behavioral foresights generated by functional descriptive models (e.g. Prospect Theory). Our analysis prescribes a recipe for derivation of explainable, useful predictions of human decisions.
This paper identifies stylistic differences in instruction-giving observed in a corpus of human-robot dialogue. Differences in verbosity and structure (i.e., single-intent vs. multi-intent instructions) arose naturally without restrictions or prior g
uidance on how users should speak with the robot. Different styles were found to produce different rates of miscommunication, and correlations were found between style differences and individual user variation, trust, and interaction experience with the robot. Understanding potential consequences and factors that influence style can inform design of dialogue systems that are robust to natural variation from human users.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
