SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Jiepu Jiang

Publications and source records attributed to Jiepu Jiang.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Multi-dimensional Evaluation of Empathetic Dialog Responses

Empathy is critical for effective and satisfactory conversational communication. Prior efforts to measure conversational empathy mostly focus on expressed communicative intents -- that is, the way empathy is expressed. Yet, these works ignore the fact that conversation is also a collaboration involving both speakers and listeners. In contrast, we propose a multi-dimensional empathy evaluation framework to measure both \emph{expressed intents from the speaker's perspective} and \emph{perceived empathy from the listener's perspective}. We apply our analytical framework to examine internal customer-service dialogues. We find the two dimensions (expressed intent types and perceived empathy) are inter-connected, while perceived empathy has high correlations with dialogue satisfaction levels. To reduce the annotation cost, we explore different options to automatically measure conversational empathy: prompting LLMs and training language model-based classifiers. Our experiments show that prompting methods with even popular models like GPT-4 and Flan family models perform relatively poorly on both public and our internal datasets. In contrast, instruction-finetuned classifiers based on Flan-T5 family models outperform prior works and competitive baselines. We conduct a detailed ablation study to give more insights into instruction finetuning method's strong performance.

cs.CL

Automated Evaluation of Personalized Text Generation using Large Language Models

Personalized text generation presents a specialized mechanism for delivering content that is specific to a user's personal context. While the research progress in this area has been rapid, evaluation still presents a challenge. Traditional automated metrics such as BLEU and ROUGE primarily measure lexical similarity to human-written references, and are not able to distinguish personalization from other subtle semantic aspects, thus falling short of capturing the nuances of personalized generated content quality. On the other hand, human judgments are costly to obtain, especially in the realm of personalized evaluation. Inspired by these challenges, we explore the use of large language models (LLMs) for evaluating personalized text generation, and examine their ability to understand nuanced user context. We present AuPEL, a novel evaluation method that distills three major semantic aspects of the generated text: personalization, quality and relevance, and automatically measures these aspects. To validate the effectiveness of AuPEL, we design carefully controlled experiments and compare the accuracy of the evaluation judgments made by LLMs versus that of judgements made by human annotators, and conduct rigorous analyses of the consistency and sensitivity of the proposed metric. We find that, compared to existing evaluation metrics, AuPEL not only distinguishes and ranks models based on their personalization abilities more accurately, but also presents commendable consistency and efficiency for this task. Our work suggests that using LLMs as the evaluators of personalized text generation is superior to traditional text similarity metrics, even though interesting new challenges still remain.

cs.CL

User Participation in an Academic Social Networking Service: A Survey of Open Group Users on Mendeley

Although there are a number of social networking services that specifically target scholars, little has been published about the actual practices and the usage of these so-called academic social networking services (ASNSs). To fill this gap, we explore the populations of academics who engage in social activities using an ASNS; as an indicator of further engagement, we also determine their various motivations for joining a group in ASNSs. Using groups and their members in Mendeley as the platform for our case study, we obtained 146 participant responses from our online survey about users' common activities, usage habits, and motivations for joining groups. Our results show that 1) participants did not engage with social-based features as frequently and actively as they engaged with research-based features, and 2) users who joined more groups seemed to have a stronger motivation to increase their professional visibility and to contribute the research articles they had read to the group reading list. Our results generate interesting insights into Mendeley's user populations, their activities, and their motivations relative to the social features of Mendeley. We also argue that further design of ASNSs is needed to take greater account of disciplinary differences in scholarly communication and to establish incentive mechanisms for encouraging user participation.

cs.SI