T ask-Oriented Dialog Systems that Consider Multiple Appropriate Responses under the Same Context Yichi Zhang Tsinghua University Beijing, China zhangyic17@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn Abstract Conversations have an intrinsic one-to-many property, which means that multiple responses can be appropriate for the same dialog context. In task-oriented dialogs, this property leads to different valid dialog policies towards task completion. However, none of the existing task-oriented dialog generation approaches takes this property into account. We propose a Multi-Action Data Augmentation (MADA) framework to utilize the one-to-many property to generate diverse appropriate dialog responses. Specifically, we first use dialog states to summarize the dialog history, and then discover all possible mappings from every dialog state to its different valid system actions. During dialog system training, we enable the current dialog state to map to all valid system actions discovered in the previous process to create additional state-action pairs. By incorporating these additional pairs, the dialog policy learns a balanced action distribution, which further guides the dialog model to generate diverse responses. Experimental results show that the proposed framework consistently improves dialog policy diversity, and results in improved response diversity and appropriateness. Introduction One big challenge in dialog system generation is that multiple responses can be appropriate under the same conversation context. This challenge originated from the intrinsic diversity of human conversations. Although recent progress in sequence-to-sequence (seq2seq) learning (Sutskever, Vinyals, and Le 2014) improves dialog systems performance (Serban et al. 2017; Wen et al. 2017; Lei et al. 2018).

GuessWhat?! is a visual dialogue task between a guesser and an oracle. The guesser aims to locate an object supposed by the oracle oneself in an image by asking a sequence of Yes/No questions. Asking proper questions with the progress of dialogue is vital for achieving successful final guess. As a result, the progress of dialogue should be properly represented and tracked. Previous models for question generation pay less attention on the representation and tracking of dialogue states, and therefore are prone to asking low quality questions such as repeated questions. This paper proposes visual dialogue state tracking (VDST) based method for question generation. A visual dialogue state is defined as the distribution on objects in the image as well as representations of objects. Representations of objects are updated with the change of the distribution on objects. An object-difference based attention is used to decode new question. The distribution on objects is updated by comparing the question-answer pair and objects. Experimental results on GuessWhat?! dataset show that our model significantly outperforms existing methods and achieves new state-of-the-art performance. It is also noticeable that our model reduces the rate of repeated questions from more than 50% to 21.9% compared with previous state-of-the-art methods.

But how do you turn that feedback into meaningful customer insights? In the past, companies used things like surveys to try to narrow down a general good/bad/neutral response to their recent marketing campaign or product. Still, there is so much more information in the form of unstructured data that could help companies better understand their customers. Whether they are using social media, blogs, forums, reviews, or online news commenting, customers are sharing their opinions in tons of different ways every single day. The only issue: many of these opinions are shared in nuanced ways that traditional AI hasn't been able to navigate.

To have an effective conversation, it is important to understand the sentiment and respond appropriately. In a customer service call, a simple acknowledgment when talking to an unhappy customer might be helpful, such as, "Sorry to hear you are having trouble." Understanding sentiment is also useful in determining when you need to hand over the call to a human agent for additional support. To achieve such a conversational flow with a bot, you have to detect the sentiment expressed by the user and react appropriately. Previously, you had to build a custom integration by using Comprehend APIs.

Sentiment essentially relates to feelings; attitudes, emotions and opinions. Sentiment Analysis refers to the practice of applying Natural Language Processing and Text Analysis techniques to identify and extract subjective information from a piece of text. A person's opinion or feelings are for the most part subjective and not facts. Which means to accurately analyze an individual's opinion or mood from a piece of text can be extremely difficult. With Sentiment Analysis from a text analytics point of view, we are essentially looking to get an understanding of the attitude of a writer with respect to a topic in a piece of text and its polarity; whether it's positive, negative or neutral.

From virtual assistants to content moderation, sentiment analysis has a wide range of use cases. AI models that can recognize emotion and opinion have a myriad of applications in numerous industries. Therefore, there is a large growing interest in the creation of emotionally intelligent machines. The same can be said for the research being done in natural language processing (NLP). To highlight some of the work being done in the field, below are five essential papers on sentiment analysis and sentiment classification.

Dialogue response generation (DRG) is a critical component of task-oriented dialogue systems (TDSs). Its purpose is to generate proper natural language responses given some context, e.g., historical utterances, system states, etc. State-of-the-art work focuses on how to better tackle DRG in an end-to-end way. Typically, such studies assume that each token is drawn from a single distribution over the output vocabulary, which may not always be optimal. Responses vary greatly with different intents, e.g., domains, system actions. We propose a novel mixture-of-generators network (MoGNet) for DRG, where we assume that each token of a response is drawn from a mixture of distributions. MoGNet consists of a chair generator and several expert generators. Each expert is specialized for DRG w.r.t. a particular intent. The chair coordinates multiple experts and combines the output they have generated to produce more appropriate responses. We propose two strategies to help the chair make better decisions, namely, a retrospective mixture-of-generators (RMoG) and prospective mixture-of-generators (PMoG). The former only considers the historical expert-generated responses until the current time step while the latter also considers possible expert-generated responses in the future by encouraging exploration. In order to differentiate experts, we also devise a global-and-local (GL) learning scheme that forces each expert to be specialized towards a particular intent using a local loss and trains the chair and all experts to coordinate using a global loss. We carry out extensive experiments on the MultiWOZ benchmark dataset. MoGNet significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods in terms of both automatic and human evaluations, demonstrating its effectiveness for DRG.

An automated metric to evaluate dialogue quality is vital for optimizing data driven dialogue management. The common approach of relying on explicit user feedback during a conversation is intrusive and sparse. Current models to estimate user satisfaction use limited feature sets and employ annotation schemes with limited generalizability to conversations spanning multiple domains. To address these gaps, we created a new Response Quality annotation scheme, introduced five new domain-independent feature sets and experimented with six machine learning models to estimate User Satisfaction at both turn and dialogue level. Response Quality ratings achieved significantly high correlation (0.76) with explicit turn-level user ratings. Using the new feature sets we introduced, Gradient Boosting Regression model achieved best (rating [1-5]) prediction performance on 26 seen (linear correlation ~0.79) and one new multi-turn domain (linear correlation 0.67). We observed a 16% relative improvement (68% -> 79%) in binary ("satisfactory/dissatisfactory") class prediction accuracy of a domain-independent dialogue-level satisfaction estimation model after including predicted turn-level satisfaction ratings as features.

Should being comparable to BERT really be your goal here? The thing about BERT is that it wasn't really specifically designed for sentiment analysis. It just happens that it does that well too. But there's no reason to believe it's anywhere close to the "best way" to do sentiment analysis. I mean, as an analogy, pulling out a calculator to make a quick computation is often more convenient than booting up Matlab to do it, but using this fact to extol the merits of calculator kind of misses the point. If you want to describe how good your model is, you really should choose more relevant comparisons.