PersonaFeedback provides a human-labeled benchmark showing current LLMs, including strong reasoners, score only about 65-70 percent on hard personalization choices, and explicit persona information helps more than retrieval.
RefGPT: Dialogue Generation of GPT, by GPT, and for GPT
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have attained the impressive capability to resolve a wide range of NLP tasks by fine-tuning high-quality instruction data. However, collecting human-written data of high quality, especially multi-turn dialogues, is expensive and unattainable for most people. Though previous studies have used powerful LLMs to generate the dialogues automatically, they all suffer from generating untruthful dialogues because of the model hallucination. Therefore, we propose a method called RefGPT to generate enormous truthful and customized dialogues without worrying about factual errors caused by the model hallucination. RefGPT solves the model hallucination in dialogue generation by restricting the LLMs to leverage the given reference instead of reciting their own knowledge to generate dialogues. Additionally, RefGPT adds detailed controls on every utterance to enable high customization capability, which previous studies have ignored. On the basis of RefGPT, we also propose two high-quality dialogue datasets generated by GPT-4, namely RefGPT-Fact and RefGPT-Code. RefGPT-Fact is a dataset with 100k multi-turn dialogues based on factual knowledge and RefGPT-Code has 76k multi-turn dialogues covering a wide range of coding scenarios. Our code and datasets are released in https://github.com/mutonix/RefGPT.
citation-role summary
citation-polarity summary
fields
cs.CL 1years
2025 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1roles
background 1polarities
unclear 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
PersonaFeedback: A Large-scale Human-annotated Benchmark For Personalization
PersonaFeedback provides a human-labeled benchmark showing current LLMs, including strong reasoners, score only about 65-70 percent on hard personalization choices, and explicit persona information helps more than retrieval.