paper-with-me

Papers

Actionable Conversational Quality Indicators for Improving Task-Oriented Dialog Systems

2021-09-22 · Michael Higgins, Dominic Widdows, Chris Brew, Gwen Christian, Andrew Maurer, Matthew Dunn, Sujit Mathi, Akshay Hazare, George Bonev, Beth Ann Hockey, Kristen Howell, Joe Bradley

Automatic dialog systems have become a mainstream part of online customer service. Many such systems are built, maintained, and improved by customer service specialists, rather than dialog systems engineers and computer programmers. As conversations between people and machines become commonplace, it is critical to understand what is working, what is not, and what actions can be taken to reduce the frequency of inappropriate system responses. These analyses and recommendations need to be presented in terms that directly reflect the user experience rather than the internal dialog processing. This paper introduces and explains the use of Actionable Conversational Quality Indicators (ACQIs), which are used both to recognize parts of dialogs that can be improved, and to recommend how to improve them. This combines benefits of previous approaches, some of which have focused on producing dialog quality scoring while others have sought to categorize the types of errors the dialog system is making. We demonstrate the effectiveness of using ACQIs on LivePerson internal dialog systems used in commercial customer service applications, and on the publicly available CMU LEGOv2 conversational dataset (Raux et al. 2005). We report on the annotation and analysis of conversational datasets showing which ACQIs are important to fix in various situations. The annotated datasets are then used to build a predictive model which uses a turn-based vector embedding of the message texts and achieves an 79% weighted average f1-measure at the task of finding the correct ACQI for a given conversation. We predict that if such a model worked perfectly, the range of potential improvement actions a bot-builder must consider at each turn could be reduced by an average of 81%.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX arXiv:2109.11064

Code (0)

등록된 구현이 없습니다.

Methods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론

Golden Queue Managers 설명 없음

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

Benchmarking the Benchmarks: Evaluating Benchmarks for Conversational Agents

2026-08-06 · Noam Koren, Roy Bar-Haim, Abigail Goldsteen arxiv

Task-oriented conversational agents are evaluated using curated or automatically generated benchmarks, yet benchmark quality is rarely assessed. Poor benchmarks may contain inconsistent tasks, simplistic scenarios, or li…

Mind the Goal: Data-Efficient Goal-Oriented Evaluation of Conversational Agents and Chatbots using Teacher Models

2025-10-04 · Deepak Babu Piskala, Sharlene Chen, Udita Patel, Parul Kalra 외 arxiv

Evaluating the quality of multi-turn chatbot interactions remains challenging, as most existing methods assess interactions at the turn level without addressing whether a user's overarching goal was fulfilled. A ``goal''…

clem:todd: A Framework for the Systematic Benchmarking of LLM-Based Task-Oriented Dialogue System Realisations

2025-05-08 · Chalamalasetti Kranti, Sherzod Hakimov, David Schlangen

The emergence of instruction-tuned large language models (LLMs) has advanced the field of dialogue systems, enabling both realistic user simulations and robust multi-turn conversational agents. However, existing research…

BenchmarkingTask-Oriented Dialogue Systems

What Did You Say? Task-Oriented Dialog Datasets Are Not Conversational!?

2022-03-07 · Alice Shoshana Jakobovits, Francesco Piccinno, Yasemin Altun

High-quality datasets for task-oriented dialog are crucial for the development of virtual assistants. Yet three of the most relevant large scale dialog datasets suffer from one common flaw: the dialog state update can be…

dialog state trackingSemantic Parsing

PersonaLens: A Benchmark for Personalization Evaluation in Conversational AI Assistants

2025-06-11 · Zheng Zhao, Clara Vania, Subhradeep Kayal, Naila Khan 외

Large language models (LLMs) have advanced conversational AI assistants. However, systematically evaluating how well these assistants apply personalization--adapting to individual user preferences while completing tasks-…