Quantifying the Causal Effects of Conversational Tendencies
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2009.03897v1
- Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2020 18:00:00 GMT
- Title: Quantifying the Causal Effects of Conversational Tendencies
- Authors: Justine Zhang, Sendhil Mullainathan, Cristian Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil
- Abstract summary: Drawing causal links between conversational behaviors and outcomes is a necessary step in using them in a prescriptive fashion.
We focus on the task of determining a particular type of policy for a text-based crisis counseling platform.
We show how to circumvent these inference challenges in our particular domain.
- Score: 17.506263520769927
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Understanding what leads to effective conversations can aid the design of
better computer-mediated communication platforms. In particular, prior
observational work has sought to identify behaviors of individuals that
correlate to their conversational efficiency. However, translating such
correlations to causal interpretations is a necessary step in using them in a
prescriptive fashion to guide better designs and policies.
In this work, we formally describe the problem of drawing causal links
between conversational behaviors and outcomes. We focus on the task of
determining a particular type of policy for a text-based crisis counseling
platform: how best to allocate counselors based on their behavioral tendencies
exhibited in their past conversations. We apply arguments derived from causal
inference to underline key challenges that arise in conversational settings
where randomized trials are hard to implement. Finally, we show how to
circumvent these inference challenges in our particular domain, and illustrate
the potential benefits of an allocation policy informed by the resulting
prescriptive information.
Related papers
- Contrastive Learning for Inference in Dialogue [56.20733835058695]
Inference, especially those derived from inductive processes, is a crucial component in our conversation.
Recent large language models show remarkable advances in inference tasks.
But their performance in inductive reasoning, where not all information is present in the context, is far behind deductive reasoning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-19T04:49:36Z) - DiPlomat: A Dialogue Dataset for Situated Pragmatic Reasoning [89.92601337474954]
Pragmatic reasoning plays a pivotal role in deciphering implicit meanings that frequently arise in real-life conversations.
We introduce a novel challenge, DiPlomat, aiming at benchmarking machines' capabilities on pragmatic reasoning and situated conversational understanding.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-15T10:41:23Z) - Social Influence Dialogue Systems: A Scoping Survey of the Efforts
Towards Influence Capabilities of Dialogue Systems [50.57882213439553]
Social influence dialogue systems are capable of persuasion, negotiation, and therapy.
There exists no formal definition or category for dialogue systems with these skills.
This study serves as a comprehensive reference for social influence dialogue systems to inspire more dedicated research and discussion in this emerging area.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-10-11T17:57:23Z) - Interacting with Non-Cooperative User: A New Paradigm for Proactive
Dialogue Policy [83.61404191470126]
We propose a new solution named I-Pro that can learn Proactive policy in the Interactive setting.
Specifically, we learn the trade-off via a learned goal weight, which consists of four factors.
The experimental results demonstrate I-Pro significantly outperforms baselines in terms of effectiveness and interpretability.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-04-07T14:11:31Z) - Text as Causal Mediators: Research Design for Causal Estimates of
Differential Treatment of Social Groups via Language Aspects [7.175621752912443]
We propose a causal research design for observational (non-experimental) data to estimate the natural direct and indirect effects of social group signals on speakers' responses.
We illustrate the promises and challenges of this framework via a theoretical case study of the effect of an advocate's gender on interruptions from justices during U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-09-15T19:15:35Z) - Coreference-Aware Dialogue Summarization [24.986030179701405]
We investigate approaches to explicitly incorporate coreference information in neural abstractive dialogue summarization models.
Experimental results show that the proposed approaches achieve state-of-the-art performance.
Evaluation results on factual correctness suggest such coreference-aware models are better at tracing the information flow among interlocutors.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-16T05:18:50Z) - Who Responded to Whom: The Joint Effects of Latent Topics and Discourse
in Conversation Structure [53.77234444565652]
We identify the responding relations in the conversation discourse, which link response utterances to their initiations.
We propose a model to learn latent topics and discourse in word distributions, and predict pairwise initiation-response links.
Experimental results on both English and Chinese conversations show that our model significantly outperforms the previous state of the arts.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-04-17T17:46:00Z) - Multi-turn Dialogue Reading Comprehension with Pivot Turns and Knowledge [43.352833140317486]
Multi-turn dialogue reading comprehension aims to teach machines to read dialogue contexts and solve tasks such as response selection and answering questions.
This work makes the first attempt to tackle the above two challenges by extracting substantially important turns as pivot utterances.
We propose a pivot-oriented deep selection model (PoDS) on top of the Transformer-based language models for dialogue comprehension.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-02-10T15:00:12Z) - Fact-based Dialogue Generation with Convergent and Divergent Decoding [2.28438857884398]
This paper proposes an end-to-end fact-based dialogue system augmented with the ability of convergent and divergent thinking.
Our model incorporates a novel convergent and divergent decoding that can generate informative and diverse responses.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-05-06T23:49:35Z) - What Changed Your Mind: The Roles of Dynamic Topics and Discourse in
Argumentation Process [78.4766663287415]
This paper presents a study that automatically analyzes the key factors in argument persuasiveness.
We propose a novel neural model that is able to track the changes of latent topics and discourse in argumentative conversations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-02-10T04:27:48Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.