BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Ahtsham Manzoor

Ahtsham Manzoor contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Artificial IntelligenceComputation and LanguageInformation RetrievalHuman-Computer Interaction

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
4topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

INFACT: An Online Human Evaluation Framework for Conversational Recommendation

Conversational recommender systems (CRS) are interactive agents that support their users in recommendation-related goals through multi-turn conversations. Generally, a CRS can be evaluated in various dimensions. Today's CRS mainly rely on offline(computational) measures to assess the performance of their algorithms in comparison to different baselines. However, offline measures can have limitations, for example, when the metrics for comparing a newly generated response with a ground truth do not correlate with human perceptions, because various alternative generated responses might be suitable too in a given dialog situation. Current research on machine learning-based CRS models therefore acknowledges the importance of humans in the evaluation process, knowing that pure offline measures may not be sufficient in evaluating a highly interactive system like a CRS.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

INSPIRED2: An Improved Dataset for Sociable Conversational Recommendation

Conversational recommender systems (CRS) that are able to interact with users in natural language often utilize recommendation dialogs which were previously collected with the help of paired humans, where one plays the role of a seeker and the other as a recommender. These recommendation dialogs include items and entities that indicate the users' preferences. In order to precisely model the seekers' preferences and respond consistently, CRS typically rely on item and entity annotations. A recent example of such a dataset is INSPIRED, which consists of recommendation dialogs for sociable conversational recommendation, where items and entities were annotated using automatic keyword or pattern matching techniques. An analysis of this dataset unfortunately revealed that there is a substantial number of cases where items and entities were either wrongly annotated or annotations were missing at all. This leads to the question to what extent automatic techniques for annotations are effective. Moreover, it is important to study impact of annotation quality on the overall effectiveness of a CRS in terms of the quality of the system's responses. To study these aspects, we manually fixed the annotations in INSPIRED. We then evaluated the performance of several benchmark CRS using both versions of the dataset. Our analyses suggest that the improved version of the dataset, i.e., INSPIRED2, helped increase the performance of several benchmark CRS, emphasizing the importance of data quality both for end-to-end learning and retrieval-based approaches to conversational recommendation. We release our improved dataset (INSPIRED2) publicly at https://github.com/ahtsham58/INSPIRED2.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Towards Retrieval-based Conversational Recommendation

Conversational recommender systems have attracted immense attention recently. The most recent approaches rely on neural models trained on recorded dialogs between humans, implementing an end-to-end learning process. These systems are commonly designed to generate responses given the user's utterances in natural language. One main challenge is that these generated responses both have to be appropriate for the given dialog context and must be grammatically and semantically correct. An alternative to such generation-based approaches is to retrieve responses from pre-recorded dialog data and to adapt them if needed. Such retrieval-based approaches were successfully explored in the context of general conversational systems, but have received limited attention in recent years for CRS. In this work, we re-assess the potential of such approaches and design and evaluate a novel technique for response retrieval and ranking. A user study (N=90) revealed that the responses by our system were on average of higher quality than those of two recent generation-based systems. We furthermore found that the quality ranking of the two generation-based approaches is not aligned with the results from the literature, which points to open methodological questions. Overall, our research underlines that retrieval-based approaches should be considered an alternative or complement to language generation approaches.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access