As the capabilities of chatbots and their underlying LLMs continue to dramatically improve, evaluating their performance has increasingly become a major blocker to their further development. A major challenge is the available benchmarking datasets, which are largely static, outdated, and lacking in multilingual coverage, limiting their ability to capture subtle linguistic and cultural variations. This paper introduces MEDAL, an automated multi-agent framework for generating, evaluating, and curating more representative and diverse open-domain dialogue evaluation benchmarks. Our approach leverages several state-of-the-art LLMs to generate user-chatbot multilingual dialogues, conditioned on varied seed contexts. A strong LLM (GPT-4.1) is then used for a multidimensional analysis of the performance of the chatbots, uncovering noticeable cross-lingual performance differences. Guided by this large-scale evaluation, we curate a new meta-evaluation multilingual benchmark and human-annotate samples with nuanced quality judgments. This benchmark is then used to assess the ability of several reasoning and non-reasoning LLMs to act as evaluators of open-domain dialogues. We find that current LLMs struggle to detect nuanced issues, particularly those involving empathy and reasoning.
Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized their ability to handle single-turn tasks, yet real-world applications demand sophisticated multi-turn interactions. This survey provides a comprehensive review of recent advancements in evaluating and enhancing multi-turn interactions in LLMs. Focusing on task-specific scenarios, from instruction following in diverse domains such as math and coding to complex conversational engagements in roleplay, healthcare, education, and even adversarial jailbreak settings, we systematically examine the challenges of maintaining context, coherence, fairness, and responsiveness over prolonged dialogues. The paper organizes current benchmarks and datasets into coherent categories that reflect the evolving landscape of multi-turn dialogue evaluation. In addition, we review a range of enhancement methodologies under multi-turn settings, including model-centric strategies (contextual learning, supervised fine-tuning, reinforcement learning, and new architectures), external integration approaches (memory-augmented, retrieval-based methods, and knowledge graph), and agent-based techniques for collaborative interactions. Finally, we discuss open challenges and propose future directions for research to further advance the robustness and effectiveness of multi-turn interactions in LLMs. Related resources and papers are available at https://github.com/yubol-cmu/Awesome-Multi-Turn-LLMs.
In this paper, we describe our participation in the RuTermEval competition devoted to extracting nested terms. We apply the Binder model, which was previously successfully applied to the recognition of nested named entities, to extract nested terms. We obtained the best results of term recognition in all three tracks of the RuTermEval competition. In addition, we study the new task of recognition of nested terms from flat training data annotated with terms without nestedness. We can conclude that several approaches we proposed in this work are viable enough to retrieve nested terms effectively without nested labeling of them.
In this paper, we introduce the Dialogue Evaluation shared task on extraction of structured opinions from Russian news texts. The task of the contest is to extract opinion tuples for a given sentence; the tuples are composed of a sentiment holder, its target, an expression and sentiment from the holder to the target. In total, the task received more than 100 submissions. The participants experimented mainly with large language models in zero-shot, few-shot and fine-tuning formats. The best result on the test set was obtained with fine-tuning of a large language model. We also compared 30 prompts and 11 open source language models with 3-32 billion parameters in the 1-shot and 10-shot settings and found the best models and prompts.
The standard language modeling (LM) loss by itself has been shown to be inadequate for effective dialogue modeling. As a result, various training approaches, such as auxiliary loss functions and leveraging human feedback, are being adopted to enrich open-domain dialogue systems. One such auxiliary loss function is Bag-of-Words (BoW) loss, defined as the cross-entropy loss for predicting all the words/tokens of the next utterance. In this work, we propose a novel auxiliary loss named Bag-of-Keywords (BoK) loss to capture the central thought of the response through keyword prediction and leverage it to enhance the generation of meaningful and interpretable responses in open-domain dialogue systems. BoK loss upgrades the BoW loss by predicting only the keywords or critical words/tokens of the next utterance, intending to estimate the core idea rather than the entire response. We incorporate BoK loss in both encoder-decoder (T5) and decoder-only (DialoGPT) architecture and train the models to minimize the weighted sum of BoK and LM (BoK-LM) loss. We perform our experiments on two popular open-domain dialogue datasets, DailyDialog and Persona-Chat. We show that the inclusion of BoK loss improves the dialogue generation of backbone models while also enabling post-hoc interpretability. We also study the effectiveness of BoK-LM loss as a reference-free metric and observe comparable performance to the state-of-the-art metrics on various dialogue evaluation datasets.
Advancements in dialogue systems powered by large language models (LLMs) have outpaced the development of reliable evaluation metrics, particularly for diverse and creative responses. We present a benchmark for evaluating the robustness of reference-free dialogue metrics against four categories of adversarial attacks: speaker tag prefixes, static responses, ungrammatical responses, and repeated conversational context. We analyze metrics such as DialogRPT, UniEval, and PromptEval -- a prompt-based method leveraging LLMs -- across grounded and ungrounded datasets. By examining both their correlation with human judgment and susceptibility to adversarial attacks, we find that these two axes are not always aligned; metrics that appear to be equivalent when judged by traditional benchmarks may, in fact, vary in their scores of adversarial responses. These findings motivate the development of nuanced evaluation frameworks to address real-world dialogue challenges.
Although human evaluation remains the gold standard for open-domain dialogue evaluation, the growing popularity of automated evaluation using Large Language Models (LLMs) has also extended to dialogue. However, most frameworks leverage benchmarks that assess older chatbots on aspects such as fluency and relevance, which are not reflective of the challenges associated with contemporary models. In fact, a qualitative analysis on Soda, a GPT-3.5 generated dialogue dataset, suggests that current chatbots may exhibit several recurring issues related to coherence and commonsense knowledge, but generally produce highly fluent and relevant responses. Noting the aforementioned limitations, this paper introduces Soda-Eval, an annotated dataset based on Soda that covers over 120K turn-level assessments across 10K dialogues, where the annotations were generated by GPT-4. Using Soda-Eval as a benchmark, we then study the performance of several open-access instruction-tuned LLMs, finding that dialogue evaluation remains challenging. Fine-tuning these models improves performance over few-shot inferences, both in terms of correlation and explanation.
Despite being heralded as the new standard for dialogue evaluation, the closed-source nature of GPT-4 poses challenges for the community. Motivated by the need for lightweight, open source, and multilingual dialogue evaluators, this paper introduces GenResCoh (Generated Responses targeting Coherence). GenResCoh is a novel LLM generated dataset comprising over 130k negative and positive responses and accompanying explanations seeded from XDailyDialog and XPersona covering English, French, German, Italian, and Chinese. Leveraging GenResCoh, we propose ECoh (Evaluation of Coherence), a family of evaluators trained to assess response coherence across multiple languages. Experimental results demonstrate that ECoh achieves multilingual detection capabilities superior to the teacher model (GPT-3.5-Turbo) on GenResCoh, despite being based on a much smaller architecture. Furthermore, the explanations provided by ECoh closely align in terms of quality with those generated by the teacher model.
The long-standing one-to-many problem of gold standard responses in open-domain dialogue systems presents challenges for automatic evaluation metrics. Though prior works have demonstrated some success by applying powerful Large Language Models (LLMs), existing approaches still struggle with the one-to-many problem, and exhibit subpar performance in domain-specific scenarios. We assume the commonsense reasoning biases within LLMs may hinder their performance in domainspecific evaluations. To address both issues, we propose a novel framework SLIDE (Small and Large Integrated for Dialogue Evaluation), that leverages both a small, specialised model (SLM), and LLMs for the evaluation of open domain dialogues. Our approach introduces several techniques: (1) Contrastive learning to differentiate between robust and non-robust response embeddings; (2) A novel metric for semantic sensitivity that combines embedding cosine distances with similarity learned through neural networks, and (3) a strategy for incorporating the evaluation results from both the SLM and LLMs. Our empirical results demonstrate that our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance in both the classification and evaluation tasks, and additionally the SLIDE evaluator exhibits better correlation with human judgements. Our code is available at https:// github.com/hegehongcha/SLIDE-ACL2024.
Automatic open-domain dialogue evaluation has attracted increasing attention. Trainable evaluation metrics, typically trained with true positive and randomly selected negative responses, tend to assign higher scores to responses that share greater content similarity with a given context. However, adversarial negative responses, despite possessing high content similarity with the contexts, are semantically different. Consequently, existing evaluation metrics are not robust enough to evaluate such responses, resulting in low correlations with human judgments. While recent studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs) for open-domain dialogue evaluation, they still face challenges in effectively handling adversarial negative examples. In this paper, we propose an effective framework for open-domain dialogue evaluation, which combines domain-specific language models (SLMs) enhanced with Abstract Meaning Representation (AMR) knowledge with LLMs. The SLMs can explicitly incorporate AMR graph information of the dialogue through a gating mechanism for enhanced dialogue semantic representation learning. Both the evaluation result from the SLMs and the AMR graph information are incorporated into the LLM's prompt for enhanced evaluation performance. Experimental results on open-domain dialogue evaluation tasks demonstrate the superiority of our method compared to a wide range of state-of-the-art baselines, especially in discriminating adversarial negative responses. Our code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/Bernard-Yang/SIMAMR.
Building a reliable and automated evaluation metric is a necessary but challenging problem for open-domain dialogue systems. Recent studies proposed evaluation metrics that assess generated responses by considering their relevance to previous dialogue histories. Although effective, these metrics evaluate individual responses directly rather than considering their relative quality compared to other responses. To handle this, we propose PairEval, a novel dialogue evaluation metric for assessing responses by comparing their quality against responses in different conversations. PairEval is built on top of open-sourced and moderate-size language models, and we make them specialized in pairwise comparison between dialogue responses. Extensive experiments on multiple benchmarks demonstrate that our metric exhibits a higher correlation with human judgments than baseline metrics. We also find that the proposed comparative metric is more robust in detecting common failures from open-domain dialogue systems, including repetition and speaker insensitivity.
Automatic evaluation is an integral aspect of dialogue system research. The traditional reference-based NLG metrics are generally found to be unsuitable for dialogue assessment. Consequently, recent studies have suggested various unique, reference-free neural metrics that better align with human evaluations. Notably among them, large language models (LLMs), particularly the instruction-tuned variants like ChatGPT, are shown to be promising substitutes for human judges. Yet, existing works on utilizing LLMs for automatic dialogue evaluation are limited in their scope in terms of the number of meta-evaluation datasets, mode of evaluation, coverage of LLMs, etc. Hence, it remains inconclusive how effective these LLMs are. To this end, we conduct a comprehensive study on the application of LLMs for automatic dialogue evaluation. Specifically, we analyze the multi-dimensional evaluation capability of 30 recently emerged LLMs at both turn and dialogue levels, using a comprehensive set of 12 meta-evaluation datasets. Additionally, we probe the robustness of the LLMs in handling various adversarial perturbations at both turn and dialogue levels. Finally, we explore how model-level and dimension-level ensembles impact the evaluation performance. All resources are available at https://github.com/e0397123/comp-analysis.
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable breakthroughs in new dialogue capabilities by leveraging instruction tuning, which refreshes human impressions of dialogue systems. The long-standing goal of dialogue systems is to be human-like enough to establish long-term connections with users. Therefore, there has been an urgent need to evaluate LLMs as human-like dialogue systems. In this paper, we propose DialogBench, a dialogue evaluation benchmark that contains 12 dialogue tasks to probe the capabilities of LLMs as human-like dialogue systems should have. Specifically, we prompt GPT-4 to generate evaluation instances for each task. We first design the basic prompt based on widely used design principles and further mitigate the existing biases to generate higher-quality evaluation instances. Our extensive tests on English and Chinese DialogBench of 26 LLMs show that instruction tuning improves the human likeness of LLMs to a certain extent, but most LLMs still have much room for improvement as human-like dialogue systems. Interestingly, results also show that the positioning of assistant AI can make instruction tuning weaken the human emotional perception of LLMs and their mastery of information about human daily life.
Recent advancements in reference-free learned metrics for open-domain dialogue evaluation have been driven by the progress in pre-trained language models and the availability of dialogue data with high-quality human annotations. However, current studies predominantly concentrate on English dialogues, and the generalization of these metrics to other languages has not been fully examined. This is largely due to the absence of a multilingual dialogue evaluation benchmark. To address the issue, we introduce xDial-Eval, built on top of open-source English dialogue evaluation datasets. xDial-Eval includes 12 turn-level and 6 dialogue-level English datasets, comprising 14930 annotated turns and 8691 annotated dialogues respectively. The English dialogue data are extended to nine other languages with commercial machine translation systems. On xDial-Eval, we conduct comprehensive analyses of previous BERT-based metrics and the recently-emerged large language models. Lastly, we establish strong self-supervised and multilingual baselines. In terms of average Pearson correlations over all datasets and languages, the best baseline outperforms OpenAI's ChatGPT by absolute improvements of 6.5% and 4.6% at the turn and dialogue levels respectively, albeit with much fewer parameters. The data and code are publicly available at https://github.com/e0397123/xDial-Eval.
Human evaluation has been widely accepted as the standard for evaluating chat-oriented dialogue systems. However, there is a significant variation in previous work regarding who gets recruited as evaluators. Evaluator groups such as domain experts, university students, and professional annotators have been used to assess and compare dialogue systems, although it is unclear to what extent the choice of an evaluator group can affect results. This paper analyzes the evaluator group impact on dialogue system evaluation by testing 4 state-of-the-art dialogue systems using 4 distinct evaluator groups. Our analysis reveals a robustness towards evaluator groups for Likert evaluations that is not seen for Pairwise, with only minor differences observed when changing evaluator groups. Furthermore, two notable limitations to this robustness are observed, which reveal discrepancies between evaluators with different levels of chatbot expertise and indicate that evaluator objectivity is beneficial for certain dialogue metrics.
Despite significant research effort in the development of automatic dialogue evaluation metrics, little thought is given to evaluating dialogues other than in English. At the same time, ensuring metrics are invariant to semantically similar responses is also an overlooked topic. In order to achieve the desired properties of robustness and multilinguality for dialogue evaluation metrics, we propose a novel framework that takes advantage of the strengths of current evaluation models with the newly-established paradigm of prompting Large Language Models (LLMs). Empirical results show our framework achieves state of the art results in terms of mean Spearman correlation scores across several benchmarks and ranks first place on both the Robust and Multilingual tasks of the DSTC11 Track 4 "Automatic Evaluation Metrics for Open-Domain Dialogue Systems", proving the evaluation capabilities of prompted LLMs.
The main limiting factor in the development of robust multilingual dialogue evaluation metrics is the lack of multilingual data and the limited availability of open sourced multilingual dialogue systems. In this work, we propose a workaround for this lack of data by leveraging a strong multilingual pretrained LLM and augmenting existing English dialogue data using Machine Translation. We empirically show that the naive approach of finetuning a pretrained multilingual encoder model with translated data is insufficient to outperform the strong baseline of finetuning a multilingual model with only source data. Instead, the best approach consists in the careful curation of translated data using MT Quality Estimation metrics, excluding low quality translations that hinder its performance.
Existing reference-free turn-level evaluation metrics for chatbots inadequately capture the interaction between the user and the system. Consequently, they often correlate poorly with human evaluations. To address this issue, we propose a novel model-agnostic approach that leverages Conditional Pointwise Mutual Information (C-PMI) to measure the turn-level interaction between the system and the user based on a given evaluation dimension. Experimental results on the widely used FED dialogue evaluation dataset demonstrate that our approach significantly improves the correlation with human judgment compared with existing evaluation systems. By replacing the negative log-likelihood-based scorer with our proposed C-PMI scorer, we achieve a relative 62.6% higher Spearman correlation on average for the FED evaluation metric. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/renll/C-PMI.
Despite the recent advances in open-domain dialogue systems, building a reliable evaluation metric is still a challenging problem. Recent studies proposed learnable metrics based on classification models trained to distinguish the correct response. However, neural classifiers are known to make overly confident predictions for examples from unseen distributions. We propose DEnsity, which evaluates a response by utilizing density estimation on the feature space derived from a neural classifier. Our metric measures how likely a response would appear in the distribution of human conversations. Moreover, to improve the performance of DEnsity, we utilize contrastive learning to further compress the feature space. Experiments on multiple response evaluation datasets show that DEnsity correlates better with human evaluations than the existing metrics. Our code is available at https://github.com/ddehun/DEnsity.
We present GLM-Dialog, a large-scale language model (LLM) with 10B parameters capable of knowledge-grounded conversation in Chinese using a search engine to access the Internet knowledge. GLM-Dialog offers a series of applicable techniques for exploiting various external knowledge including both helpful and noisy knowledge, enabling the creation of robust knowledge-grounded dialogue LLMs with limited proper datasets. To evaluate the GLM-Dialog more fairly, we also propose a novel evaluation method to allow humans to converse with multiple deployed bots simultaneously and compare their performance implicitly instead of explicitly rating using multidimensional metrics.Comprehensive evaluations from automatic to human perspective demonstrate the advantages of GLM-Dialog comparing with existing open source Chinese dialogue models. We release both the model checkpoint and source code, and also deploy it as a WeChat application to interact with users. We offer our evaluation platform online in an effort to prompt the development of open source models and reliable dialogue evaluation systems. The additional easy-to-use toolkit that consists of short text entity linking, query generation, and helpful knowledge classification is also released to enable diverse applications. All the source code is available on Github.