Recent advances in generative modeling of text have demonstrated remarkable improvements in terms of fluency and coherency. In this work we investigate to which extent a machine can discriminate real from machine generated text. This is important in itself for automatic detection of computer generated stories, but can also serve as a tool for further improving text generation. We show that learning a dedicated scoring function to discriminate between real and fake text achieves higher precision than employing the likelihood of a generative model. The scoring functions generalize to other generators than those used for training as long as these generators have comparable model complexity and are trained on similar datasets.
Using a separately trained scoring function to evaluate candidates in the beam has been recently proposed in the context of dialogue modeling by @cite_4 . There the negatives are randomly chosen next utterances from the training dataset. Here we use samples from a language model to build the set of negatives.
@cite_4
2593751037 2806935606 2122514299 2951520714
In this paper, we construct and train end-to-end neural network-based dialogue systems using an updated version of the recent Ubuntu Dialogue Corpus, a dataset containing almost 1 million multi-turn dialogues, with a total of over 7 million utterances and 100 million words. This dataset is interesting because of its size, long context lengths, and technical nature; thus, it can be used to train large models directly from data with minimal feature engineering, which can be both time consuming and expensive. We provide baselines in two different environments: one where models are trained to maximize the log-likelihood of a generated utterance conditioned on the context of the conversation, and one where models are trained to select the correct next response from a list of candidate responses. These are both evaluated on a recall task that we call Next Utterance Classification (NUC), as well as other generation-specific metrics. Finally, we provide a qualitative error analysis to help determine the most promising directions for future research on the Ubuntu Dialogue Corpus, and for end-to-end dialogue systems in general. We propose an adversarial learning approach for generating multi-turn dialogue responses. Our proposed framework, hredGAN, is based on conditional generative adversarial networks (GANs). The GAN's generator is a modified hierarchical recurrent encoder-decoder network (HRED) and the discriminator is a word-level bidirectional RNN that shares context and word embeddings with the generator. During inference, noise samples conditioned on the dialogue history are used to perturb the generator's latent space to generate several possible responses. The final response is the one ranked best by the discriminator. The hredGAN shows improved performance over existing methods: (1) it generalizes better than networks trained using only the log-likelihood criterion, and (2) it generates longer, more informative and more diverse responses with high utterance and topic relevance even with limited training data. This improvement is demonstrated on the Movie triples and Ubuntu dialogue datasets using both automatic and human evaluations. Most previous work on trainable language generation has focused on two paradigms: (a) using a generation decisions of an existing generator. Both approaches rely on the existence of a handcrafted generation component, which is likely to limit their scalability to new domains. The first contribution of this article is to present Bagel, a fully data-driven generation method that treats the language generation task as a search for the most likely sequence of semantic concepts and realization phrases, according to Factored Language Models (FLMs). As domain utterances are not readily available for most natural language generation tasks, a large creative effort is required to produce the data necessary to represent human linguistic variation for nontrivial domains. This article is based on the assumption that learning to produce paraphrases can be facilitated by collecting data from a large sample of untrained annotators using crowdsourcing—rather than a few domain experts—by relying on a coarse meaning representation. A second contribution of this article is to use crowdsourced data to show how dialogue naturalness can be improved by learning to vary the output utterances generated for a given semantic input. Two data-driven methods for generating paraphrases in dialogue are presented: (a) by sampling from the n-best list of realizations produced by Bagel's FLM reranker; and (b) by learning a structured perceptron predicting whether candidate realizations are valid paraphrases. We train Bagel on a set of 1,956 utterances produced by 137 annotators, which covers 10 types of dialogue acts and 128 semantic concepts in a tourist information system for Cambridge. An automated evaluation shows that Bagel outperforms utterance class LM baselines on this domain. A human evaluation of 600 resynthesized dialogue extracts shows that Bagel's FLM output produces utterances comparable to a handcrafted baseline, whereas the perceptron classifier performs worse. Interestingly, human judges find the system sampling from the n-best list to be more natural than a system always returning the first-best utterance. The judges are also more willing to interact with the n-best system in the future. These results suggest that capturing the large variation found in human language using data-driven methods is beneficial for dialogue interaction. In this paper, drawing intuition from the Turing test, we propose using adversarial training for open-domain dialogue generation: the system is trained to produce sequences that are indistinguishable from human-generated dialogue utterances. We cast the task as a reinforcement learning (RL) problem where we jointly train two systems, a generative model to produce response sequences, and a discriminator---analagous to the human evaluator in the Turing test--- to distinguish between the human-generated dialogues and the machine-generated ones. The outputs from the discriminator are then used as rewards for the generative model, pushing the system to generate dialogues that mostly resemble human dialogues. In addition to adversarial training we describe a model for adversarial evaluation that uses success in fooling an adversary as a dialogue evaluation metric, while avoiding a number of potential pitfalls. Experimental results on several metrics, including adversarial evaluation, demonstrate that the adversarially-trained system generates higher-quality responses than previous baselines.