Evaluating Task-oriented Dialogue Systems: A Systematic Review of Measures, Constructs and their Operationalisations

Overview

• This review provides a comprehensive overview of evaluation methods for task-oriented dialogue systems.
• The authors focus on practical applications of dialogue systems, such as customer service.
• The review covers three main areas: (1) an overview of constructs and metrics used in previous work, (2) challenges in dialogue system evaluation, and (3) a research agenda for the future of dialogue system evaluation.
• The authors conducted a systematic review of 122 studies from four major databases.

Plain English Explanation

This paper reviews the different ways researchers have evaluated dialogue systems, particularly those used in practical applications like customer service. The authors looked at a large number of previous studies to understand the different measures and methods they used to assess the performance of these dialogue systems.

The review covers three main topics. First, it provides an overview of the various factors, or "constructs," that researchers have used to evaluate dialogue systems, as well as the specific metrics they've employed. Second, it discusses the challenges and difficulties involved in properly evaluating these systems. Finally, the review proposes a research agenda for the future of dialogue system evaluation, including recommendations for how to improve the way these systems are assessed.

The authors hope that by taking a closer look at current evaluation practices, future research can take a more thoughtful and rigorous approach to assessing the quality of information extraction in dialogue systems.

Technical Explanation

The authors conducted a systematic review of 122 studies on dialogue system evaluation, identified through searches of four major academic databases (ACL, ACM, IEEE, and Web of Science). These studies were carefully analyzed to understand the different constructs and methods they used to evaluate dialogue systems.

The review found a wide variety in both the constructs (e.g., user engagement, task completion, empathy) and evaluation methods (e.g., user surveys, objective metrics, human ratings) employed across the literature. However, the authors noted that the operationalization of these constructs was not always clearly reported.

The review also discusses the emergence of large language models (LLMs) and their use in powering dialogue systems as well as being used in the evaluation process itself. The authors suggest that future research should take a more critical approach to defining and measuring the constructs used to assess dialogue system performance.

Critical Analysis

The authors recognize the complexity and challenge of properly evaluating dialogue systems, especially as the technology continues to advance with the use of large language models. They acknowledge that the current state of the field is characterized by a lack of consistency in the constructs and methods used for evaluation.

One potential limitation of the review is that it focuses primarily on task-oriented dialogue systems, rather than more open-ended or social dialogue systems. The evaluation of these latter types of dialogue systems may present additional challenges that are not fully addressed in the paper.

Additionally, the review does not delve deeply into the specific tradeoffs or potential biases inherent in the various evaluation methods (e.g., user surveys, objective metrics, human ratings). Further exploration of the strengths and weaknesses of these different approaches could provide valuable insight for researchers and practitioners.

Despite these minor limitations, the review serves as an important foundation for the dialogue system research community, highlighting the need for greater rigor and consistency in evaluation practices. The authors' recommendations for future research provide a clear roadmap for addressing these challenges and advancing the field.

Conclusion

This comprehensive review of dialogue system evaluation methods provides a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners in the field. By synthesizing the current state of the literature, the authors have identified key gaps and opportunities for improving the way these systems are assessed.

The review's findings underscore the importance of clearly defining and measuring the constructs used to evaluate dialogue systems, as well as the need for more consistent and rigorous evaluation practices. As the use of large language models continues to evolve in this domain, the authors' research agenda offers a promising path forward for developing more reliable and meaningful evaluation approaches.

Overall, this review serves as an important step towards enhancing the development and deployment of high-quality, task-oriented dialogue systems that can effectively support practical applications, such as customer service.