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
- 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) - Large Language Models are Interpretable Learners [53.56735770834617]
In this paper, we show a combination of Large Language Models (LLMs) and symbolic programs can bridge the gap between expressiveness and interpretability.
The pretrained LLM with natural language prompts provides a massive set of interpretable modules that can transform raw input into natural language concepts.
As the knowledge learned by LSP is a combination of natural language descriptions and symbolic rules, it is easily transferable to humans (interpretable) and other LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-25T02:18:15Z) - 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) - Approximating Online Human Evaluation of Social Chatbots with Prompting [11.657633779338724]
Existing evaluation metrics aim to automate offline user evaluation and approximate human judgment of pre-curated dialogs.
We propose an approach to approximate online human evaluation leveraging large language models (LLMs) from the GPT family.
We introduce a new Dialog system Evaluation framework based on Prompting (DEP), which enables a fully automatic evaluation pipeline.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-11T14:45:01Z)
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.