Interpretable User Satisfaction Estimation for Conversational Systems with Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.12388v2
• Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2024 00:58:25 GMT
• Title: Interpretable User Satisfaction Estimation for Conversational Systems with Large Language Models
• Authors: Ying-Chun Lin, Jennifer Neville, Jack W. Stokes, Longqi Yang, Tara Safavi, Mengting Wan, Scott Counts, Siddharth Suri, Reid Andersen, Xiaofeng Xu, Deepak Gupta, Sujay Kumar Jauhar, Xia Song, Georg Buscher, Saurabh Tiwary, Brent Hecht, Jaime Teevan,
• Abstract summary: Existing approaches based on featurized ML models or text embeddings fall short in extracting generalizable patterns. We show that LLMs can extract interpretable signals of user satisfaction from their natural language utterances more effectively than embedding-based approaches.
• Score: 35.95405294377247
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Accurate and interpretable user satisfaction estimation (USE) is critical for understanding, evaluating, and continuously improving conversational systems. Users express their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with diverse conversational patterns in both general-purpose (ChatGPT and Bing Copilot) and task-oriented (customer service chatbot) conversational systems. Existing approaches based on featurized ML models or text embeddings fall short in extracting generalizable patterns and are hard to interpret. In this work, we show that LLMs can extract interpretable signals of user satisfaction from their natural language utterances more effectively than embedding-based approaches. Moreover, an LLM can be tailored for USE via an iterative prompting framework using supervision from labeled examples. The resulting method, Supervised Prompting for User satisfaction Rubrics (SPUR), not only has higher accuracy but is more interpretable as it scores user satisfaction via learned rubrics with a detailed breakdown.

Related papers

• Dynamic benchmarking framework for LLM-based conversational data capture [0.0]
  This paper introduces a benchmarking framework to assess large language models (LLMs) It integrates generative agent simulation to evaluate performance on key dimensions: information extraction, context awareness, and adaptive engagement. Results show that adaptive strategies improve data extraction accuracy, especially when handling ambiguous responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T15:47:47Z)
• Unveiling User Preferences: A Knowledge Graph and LLM-Driven Approach for Conversational Recommendation [55.5687800992432]
  We propose a plug-and-play framework that synergizes Large Language Models (LLMs) and Knowledge Graphs (KGs) to unveil user preferences. This enables the LLM to transform KG entities into concise natural language descriptions, allowing them to comprehend domain-specific knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-16T11:47:21Z)
• Reference-Guided Verdict: LLMs-as-Judges in Automatic Evaluation of Free-Form Text [12.879551933541345]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are capable of generating human-like conversations. Conventional metrics like BLEU and ROUGE are inadequate for capturing the subtle semantics and contextual richness of such generative outputs. We propose a reference-guided verdict method that automates the evaluation process by leveraging multiple LLMs-as-judges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-17T16:01:45Z)
• Interactive Analysis of LLMs using Meaningful Counterfactuals [22.755345889167934]
  Counterfactual examples are useful for exploring the decision boundaries of machine learning models. How can we apply counterfactual-based methods to analyze and explain LLMs? We propose a novel algorithm for generating batches of complete and meaningful textual counterfactuals. In our experiments, 97.2% of the counterfactuals are grammatically correct.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-23T19:57:03Z)
• CAUSE: Counterfactual Assessment of User Satisfaction Estimation in Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems [60.27663010453209]
  We leverage large language models (LLMs) to generate satisfaction-aware counterfactual dialogues. We gather human annotations to ensure the reliability of the generated samples. Our results shed light on the need for data augmentation approaches for user satisfaction estimation in TOD systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-27T23:45:31Z)
• RecExplainer: Aligning Large Language Models for Explaining Recommendation Models [50.74181089742969]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable intelligence in understanding, reasoning, and instruction following. This paper presents the initial exploration of using LLMs as surrogate models to explain black-box recommender models. To facilitate an effective alignment, we introduce three methods: behavior alignment, intention alignment, and hybrid alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-18T03:05:43Z)
• Unlocking the Potential of User Feedback: Leveraging Large Language Model as User Simulator to Enhance Dialogue System [65.93577256431125]
  We propose an alternative approach called User-Guided Response Optimization (UGRO) to combine it with a smaller task-oriented dialogue model. This approach uses LLM as annotation-free user simulator to assess dialogue responses, combining them with smaller fine-tuned end-to-end TOD models. Our approach outperforms previous state-of-the-art (SOTA) results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-16T13:04:56Z)
• Rethinking the Evaluation for Conversational Recommendation in the Era of Large Language Models [115.7508325840751]
  The recent success of large language models (LLMs) has shown great potential to develop more powerful conversational recommender systems (CRSs) In this paper, we embark on an investigation into the utilization of ChatGPT for conversational recommendation, revealing the inadequacy of the existing evaluation protocol. We propose an interactive Evaluation approach based on LLMs named iEvaLM that harnesses LLM-based user simulators.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T15:12:43Z)

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.