REVIEW 3 cited by
A Comprehensive Assessment of Dialog Evaluation Metrics
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Automatic evaluation metrics are a crucial component of dialog systems research. Standard language evaluation metrics are known to be ineffective for evaluating dialog. As such, recent research has proposed a number of novel, dialog-specific metrics that correlate better with human judgements. Due to the fast pace of research, many of these metrics have been assessed on different datasets and there has as yet been no time for a systematic comparison between them. To this end, this paper provides a comprehensive assessment of recently proposed dialog evaluation metrics on a number of datasets. In this paper, 23 different automatic evaluation metrics are evaluated on 10 different datasets. Furthermore, the metrics are assessed in different settings, to better qualify their respective strengths and weaknesses. Metrics are assessed (1) on both the turn level and the dialog level, (2) for different dialog lengths, (3) for different dialog qualities (e.g., coherence, engaging), (4) for different types of response generation models (i.e., generative, retrieval, simple models and state-of-the-art models), (5) taking into account the similarity of different metrics and (6) exploring combinations of different metrics. This comprehensive assessment offers several takeaways pertaining to dialog evaluation metrics in general. It also suggests how to best assess evaluation metrics and indicates promising directions for future work.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Towards Automatic Evaluation of Task-Oriented Dialogue Flows
FuDGE and FF1 automatically score dialogue flow graphs by how compactly and completely they represent a corpus of task-oriented conversations.
-
clem:todd: A Framework for the Systematic Benchmarking of LLM-Based Task-Oriented Dialogue System Realisations
clem:todd is a self-play benchmarking framework for task-oriented dialogue systems, and its MultiWOZ 2.2 booking experiments show monolithic and LLM-managed modular systems beating a fixed pipeline at lower cost.
-
Towards Understanding the Robustness of LLM-based Evaluations under Perturbations
Gemini's scores align poorly with human judgments on summarization and dialog quality, and its scores drop sharply when the prompt includes a deliberately inverted human rating.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.