RankME: Reliable Human Ratings for Natural Language Generation

Human evaluation for natural language generation (NLG) often suffers from inconsistent user ratings. While previous research tends to attribute this problem to individual user preferences, we show that the quality of human judgements can also be improved by experimental design. We present a novel rank-based magnitude estimation method (RankME), which combines the use of continuous scales and relative assessments. We show that RankME significantly improves the reliability and consistency of human ratings compared to traditional evaluation methods. In addition, we show that it is possible to evaluate NLG systems according to multiple, distinct criteria, which is important for error analysis. Finally, we demonstrate that RankME, in combination with Bayesian estimation of system quality, is a cost-effective alternative for ranking multiple NLG systems.Comment: Accepted to NAACL 2018 (The 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Design and implementation of a user-oriented speech recognition interface: the synergy of technology and human factors

The design and implementation of a user-oriented speech recognition interface are described. The interface enables the use of speech recognition in so-called interactive voice response systems which can be accessed via a telephone connection. In the design of the interface a synergy of technology and human factors is achieved. This synergy is very important for making speech interfaces a natural and acceptable form of human-machine interaction. Important concepts such as interfaces, human factors and speech recognition are discussed. Additionally, an indication is given as to how the synergy of human factors and technology can be realised by a sketch of the interface's implementation. An explanation is also provided of how the interface might be integrated in different applications fruitfully

Relevance of Unsupervised Metrics in Task-Oriented Dialogue for Evaluating Natural Language Generation

Automated metrics such as BLEU are widely used in the machine translation literature. They have also been used recently in the dialogue community for evaluating dialogue response generation. However, previous work in dialogue response generation has shown that these metrics do not correlate strongly with human judgment in the non task-oriented dialogue setting. Task-oriented dialogue responses are expressed on narrower domains and exhibit lower diversity. It is thus reasonable to think that these automated metrics would correlate well with human judgment in the task-oriented setting where the generation task consists of translating dialogue acts into a sentence. We conduct an empirical study to confirm whether this is the case. Our findings indicate that these automated metrics have stronger correlation with human judgments in the task-oriented setting compared to what has been observed in the non task-oriented setting. We also observe that these metrics correlate even better for datasets which provide multiple ground truth reference sentences. In addition, we show that some of the currently available corpora for task-oriented language generation can be solved with simple models and advocate for more challenging datasets