Recent advances in sequence-to-sequence learning reveal a purely data-driven approach to the response generation task. Despite its diverse applications, existing neural models are prone to producing short and generic replies, making it infeasible to tackle open-domain challenges. In this research, we analyze this critical issue in light of the model's optimization goal and the specific characteristics of the human-to-human dialog corpus. By decomposing the black box into parts, a detailed analysis of the probability limit was conducted to reveal the reason behind these universal replies. Based on these analyses, we propose a max-margin ranking regularization term to avoid the models leaning to these replies. Finally, empirical experiments on case studies and benchmarks with several metrics validate this approach.
To address this issue, various works are conducted on bringing more information to influence these models. propose to utilize keywords to constrain the topic of responses, and incorporates the replies with topic information. By contrary, some researcher believed in diverse responses are just buried by the greedy beam-search rules @cite_7 , so they focus on involving more punishment or randomness in the inference stages. To illustrate, constrain the search space using mutual information with the query and randomly chose candidate words from top beams to consist short phrases. These existing works mainly focus on the generation strategies during inference, in contrast, the model's architecture and loss function have rarely been explored.
@cite_7
2204575588
We discuss the relationships between three approaches to greedy heuristic search: best-first, hill-climbing, and beam search. We consider the design decisions within each family and point out their oft-overlooked similarities. We consider the following best-first searches: weighted A*, greedy search, ASeps, window A* and multi-state commitment k-weighted A*. For hill climbing algorithms, we consider enforced hill climbing and LSS-LRTA*. We also consider a variety of beam searches, including BULB and beam-stack search. We show how to best configure beam search in order to maximize robustness. An empirical analysis on six standard benchmarks reveals that beam search and best-first search have remarkably similar performance, and outperform hill-climbing approaches in terms of both time to solution and solution quality. Of these, beam search is preferable for very large problems and best first search is better on problems where the goal cannot be reached from all states.