Neural Models and Language Model Prompting for the Multidimensional Evaluation of Open-Ended Conversations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.00841v1
• Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2025 13:24:05 GMT
• Title: Neural Models and Language Model Prompting for the Multidimensional Evaluation of Open-Ended Conversations
• Authors: Michelle Elizabeth, Alicja Kasicka, Natalia Krawczyk, Magalie Ochs, Gwénolé Lecorvé, Justyna Gromada, Lina M. Rojas-Barahona,
• Abstract summary: We develop models to predict dialogue-level, dimension-specific scores.<n>Our work follows two main strategies: employing Language Models (LMs) as evaluators through prompting, and training encoder-based classification and regression models.<n>Although their performance decreases on the test set, it is important to note that the test set contains annotations with significantly different score ranges for some of the dimensions with respect to the train and validation sets.
• Score: 1.0006801729628605
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The growing number of generative AI-based dialogue systems has made their evaluation a crucial challenge. This paper presents our contribution to this important problem through the Dialogue System Technology Challenge (DSTC-12, Track 1), where we developed models to predict dialogue-level, dimension-specific scores. Given the constraint of using relatively small models (i.e. fewer than 13 billion parameters) our work follows two main strategies: employing Language Models (LMs) as evaluators through prompting, and training encoder-based classification and regression models. Our results show that while LM prompting achieves only modest correlations with human judgments, it still ranks second on the test set, outperformed only by the baseline. The regression and classification models, with significantly fewer parameters, demonstrate high correlation for some dimensions on the validation set. Although their performance decreases on the test set, it is important to note that the test set contains annotations with significantly different score ranges for some of the dimensions with respect to the train and validation sets.

Related papers

• Evaluating Zero-Shot and One-Shot Adaptation of Small Language Models in Leader-Follower Interaction [1.3511057160494195]
  Leader-follower interaction is an important paradigm in human-robot interaction (HRI)<n>Small language models (SLMs) offer a potential alternative, but their effectiveness for role classification in HRI has not been systematically evaluated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-26T18:20:26Z)
• The Oracle Has Spoken: A Multi-Aspect Evaluation of Dialogue in Pythia [23.88625177239693]
  We employ a comprehensive suite of model-based metrics, each targeting a distinct fine-grained aspect of dialogue, motivated by linguistic theory.<n>We evaluate how the performance of pre-trained Pythia models changes with respect to each of those dimensions, depending on model size and as a result of supervised fine-tuning on conversational datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-20T01:11:10Z)
• Learning LLM Preference over Intra-Dialogue Pairs: A Framework for Utterance-level Understandings [9.763273544617176]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in handling complex dialogue tasks without requiring use case-specific fine-tuning.<n>In this paper, we introduce a simple yet effective framework to address this challenge.<n>Our approach is specifically designed for per-utterance classification problems, which encompass tasks such as intent detection, dialogue state tracking, and more.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-07T17:46:13Z)
• How Hard is this Test Set? NLI Characterization by Exploiting Training Dynamics [49.9329723199239]
  We propose a method for the automated creation of a challenging test set without relying on the manual construction of artificial and unrealistic examples. We categorize the test set of popular NLI datasets into three difficulty levels by leveraging methods that exploit training dynamics. When our characterization method is applied to the training set, models trained with only a fraction of the data achieve comparable performance to those trained on the full dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T13:39:21Z)
• Evaluating Generative Language Models in Information Extraction as Subjective Question Correction [49.729908337372436]
  We propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. Inspired by the principles in subjective question correction, we propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. Results on three information extraction tasks show that SQC-Score is more preferred by human annotators than the baseline metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T15:36:53Z)
• Split and Rephrase with Large Language Models [2.499907423888049]
  Split and Rephrase (SPRP) task consists in splitting complex sentences into a sequence of shorter grammatical sentences. We evaluate large language models on the task, showing that they can provide large improvements over the state of the art on the main metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-18T10:16:37Z)
• SimOAP: Improve Coherence and Consistency in Persona-based Dialogue Generation via Over-sampling and Post-evaluation [54.66399120084227]
  Language models trained on large-scale corpora can generate remarkably fluent results in open-domain dialogue. For the persona-based dialogue generation task, consistency and coherence are great challenges for language models. A two-stage SimOAP strategy is proposed, i.e., over-sampling and post-evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-18T17:23:00Z)
• Discover, Explanation, Improvement: An Automatic Slice Detection Framework for Natural Language Processing [72.14557106085284]
  slice detection models (SDM) automatically identify underperforming groups of datapoints. This paper proposes a benchmark named "Discover, Explain, improve (DEIM)" for classification NLP tasks. Our evaluation shows that Edisa can accurately select error-prone datapoints with informative semantic features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-08T19:00:00Z)
• Towards Quantifiable Dialogue Coherence Evaluation [126.55560816209756]
  Quantifiable Dialogue Coherence Evaluation (QuantiDCE) is a novel framework aiming to train a quantifiable dialogue coherence metric. QuantiDCE includes two training stages, Multi-Level Ranking (MLR) pre-training and Knowledge Distillation (KD) fine-tuning. Experimental results show that the model trained by QuantiDCE presents stronger correlations with human judgements than the other state-of-the-art metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-01T14:11:17Z)
• RADDLE: An Evaluation Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Robust Task-oriented Dialog Systems [75.87418236410296]
  We introduce the RADDLE benchmark, a collection of corpora and tools for evaluating the performance of models across a diverse set of domains. RADDLE is designed to favor and encourage models with a strong generalization ability. We evaluate recent state-of-the-art systems based on pre-training and fine-tuning, and find that grounded pre-training on heterogeneous dialog corpora performs better than training a separate model per domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-29T08:58:49Z)
• Joint Contextual Modeling for ASR Correction and Language Understanding [60.230013453699975]
  We propose multi-task neural approaches to perform contextual language correction on ASR outputs jointly with language understanding (LU) We show that the error rates of off the shelf ASR and following LU systems can be reduced significantly by 14% relative with joint models trained using small amounts of in-domain data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-28T22:09:25Z)

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.