Paper detail

PONE: A Novel Automatic Evaluation Metric for Open-Domain Generative Dialogue Systems

Open-domain generative dialogue systems have attracted considerable attention over the past few years. Currently, how to automatically evaluate them, is still a big challenge problem. As far as we know, there are three kinds of automatic methods to evaluate the open-domain generative dialogue systems: (1) Word-overlap-based metrics; (2) Embedding-based metrics; (3) Learning-based metrics. Due to the lack of systematic comparison, it is not clear which kind of metrics are more effective. In this paper, we will first measure systematically all kinds of automatic evaluation metrics over the same experimental setting to check which kind is best. Through extensive experiments, the learning-based metrics are demonstrated that they are the most effective evaluation metrics for open-domain generative dialogue systems. Moreover, we observe that nearly all learning-based metrics depend on the negative sampling mechanism, which obtains an extremely imbalanced and low-quality dataset to train a score model. In order to address this issue, we propose a novel and feasible learning-based metric that can significantly improve the correlation with human judgments by using augmented POsitive samples and valuable NEgative samples, called PONE. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our proposed evaluation method significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art learning-based evaluation methods, with an average correlation improvement of 13.18%. In addition, we have publicly released the codes of our proposed method and state-of-the-art baselines.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.