Understanding audio-visual content and the ability to have an informative conversation about it have both been challenging areas for intelligent systems. The Audio Visual Scene-aware Dialog (AVSD) challenge, organized as a track of the Dialog System Technology Challenge 7 (DSTC7), proposes a combined task, where a system has to answer questions pertaining to a video given a dialogue with previous question-answer pairs and the video itself. We propose for this task a hierarchical encoder-decoder model which computes a multi-modal embedding of the dialogue context. It first embeds the dialogue history using two LSTMs. We extract video and audio frames at regular intervals and compute semantic features using pre-trained I3D and VGGish models, respectively. Before summarizing both modalities into fixed-length vectors using LSTMs, we use FiLM blocks to condition them on the embeddings of the current question, which allows us to reduce the dimensionality considerably. Finally, we use an LSTM decoder that we train with scheduled sampling and evaluate using beam search. Compared to the modality-fusing baseline model released by the AVSD challenge organizers, our model achieves a relative improvements of more than 16 , scoring 0.36 BLEU-4 and more than 33 , scoring 0.997 CIDEr.
Automated evaluation of both task-oriented and non-task-oriented dialogue systems has been a challenge @cite_9 @cite_16 too. Most such dialogue systems are evaluated using per-turn evaluation metrics since there is no suitable per-dialogue metric as conversations do not need to happen in a deterministic ordering of turns. These per-turn evaluation metrics are mostly word-overlap-based metrics such as BLEU, METEOR, ROUGE, and CIDEr, borrowed from the machine translation literature. Due to the diverse nature of possible responses, world-overlap metrics are not highly suitable for evaluating these tasks. Human evaluation of generated responses is considered the most reliable metric for such tasks but it is cost prohibitive and hence the dialogue system literature continues to rely widely on word-overlap-based metrics.
@cite_9 @cite_16
2729046720 2328886022
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. We investigate evaluation metrics for dialogue response generation systems where supervised labels, such as task completion, are not available. Recent works in response generation have adopted metrics from machine translation to compare a model's generated response to a single target response. We show that these metrics correlate very weakly with human judgements in the non-technical Twitter domain, and not at all in the technical Ubuntu domain. We provide quantitative and qualitative results highlighting specific weaknesses in existing metrics, and provide recommendations for future development of better automatic evaluation metrics for dialogue systems.