C-PMI: Conditional Pointwise Mutual Information for Turn-level Dialogue Evaluation
Authors:
Liliang Ren,
Mankeerat Sidhu,
Qi Zeng,
Revanth Gangi Reddy,
Heng Ji,
ChengXiang Zhai
Abstract:
Existing reference-free turn-level evaluation metrics for chatbots inadequately capture the interaction between the user and the system. Consequently, they often correlate poorly with human evaluations. To address this issue, we propose a novel model-agnostic approach that leverages Conditional Pointwise Mutual Information (C-PMI) to measure the turn-level interaction between the system and the us…
▽ More
Existing reference-free turn-level evaluation metrics for chatbots inadequately capture the interaction between the user and the system. Consequently, they often correlate poorly with human evaluations. To address this issue, we propose a novel model-agnostic approach that leverages Conditional Pointwise Mutual Information (C-PMI) to measure the turn-level interaction between the system and the user based on a given evaluation dimension. Experimental results on the widely used FED dialogue evaluation dataset demonstrate that our approach significantly improves the correlation with human judgment compared with existing evaluation systems. By replacing the negative log-likelihood-based scorer with our proposed C-PMI scorer, we achieve a relative 62.6% higher Spearman correlation on average for the FED evaluation metric. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/renll/C-PMI.
△ Less
Submitted 1 September, 2023; v1 submitted 27 June, 2023;
originally announced June 2023.
Scientific Opinion Summarization: Paper Meta-review Generation Dataset, Methods, and Evaluation
Authors:
Qi Zeng,
Mankeerat Sidhu,
Ansel Blume,
Hou Pong Chan,
Lu Wang,
Heng Ji
Abstract:
Opinions in scientific research papers can be divergent, leading to controversies among reviewers. However, most existing datasets for opinion summarization are centered around product reviews and assume that the analyzed opinions are non-controversial, failing to account for the variability seen in other contexts such as academic papers, political debates, or social media discussions. To address…
▽ More
Opinions in scientific research papers can be divergent, leading to controversies among reviewers. However, most existing datasets for opinion summarization are centered around product reviews and assume that the analyzed opinions are non-controversial, failing to account for the variability seen in other contexts such as academic papers, political debates, or social media discussions. To address this gap, we propose the task of scientific opinion summarization, where research paper reviews are synthesized into meta-reviews. To facilitate this task, we introduce the ORSUM dataset covering 15,062 paper meta-reviews and 57,536 paper reviews from 47 conferences. Furthermore, we propose the Checklist-guided Iterative Introspection approach, which breaks down scientific opinion summarization into several stages, iteratively refining the summary under the guidance of questions from a checklist. Our experiments show that (1) human-written summaries do not always satisfy all necessary criteria such as depth of discussion, and identifying consensus and controversy for the specific domain, and (2) the combination of task decomposition and iterative self-refinement shows strong potential for enhancing the opinions and can be applied to other complex text generation using black-box LLMs.
△ Less
Submitted 15 June, 2024; v1 submitted 23 May, 2023;
originally announced May 2023.
