Users post numerous product-related questions on e-commerce platforms, affecting their purchase decisions. Product-related question answering (PQA) entails utilizing product-related resources to provide precise responses to users. We propose a novel task of Multilingual Cross-market Product-based Question Answering (MCPQA) and define the task as providing answers to product-related questions in a main marketplace by utilizing information from another resource-rich auxiliary marketplace in a multilingual context. We introduce a large-scale dataset comprising over 7 million questions from 17 marketplaces across 11 languages. We then perform automatic translation on the Electronics category of our dataset, naming it as McMarket. We focus on two subtasks: review-based answer generation and product-related question ranking. For each subtask, we label a subset of McMarket using an LLM and further evaluate the quality of the annotations via human assessment. We then conduct experiments to benchmark our dataset, using models ranging from traditional lexical models to LLMs in both single-market and cross-market scenarios across McMarket and the corresponding LLM subset. Results show that incorporating cross-market information significantly enhances performance in both tasks.

Clarifying questions are an integral component of modern information retrieval systems, directly impacting user satisfaction and overall system performance. Poorly formulated questions can lead to user frustration and confusion, negatively affecting the system’s performance. This research addresses the urgent need to identify and leverage key features that contribute to the classification of clarifying questions, enhancing user satisfaction. To gain deeper insights into how different features influence user satisfaction, we conduct a comprehensive analysis, considering a broad spectrum of lexical, semantic, and statistical features, such as question length and sentiment polarity. Our empirical results provide three main insights into the qualities of effective query clarification: (1) specific questions are more effective than generic ones; (2) the subjectivity and emotional tone of a question play a role; and (3) shorter and more ambiguous queries benefit significantly from clarification. Based on these insights, we implement feature-integrated user satisfaction prediction using various classifiers, both traditional and neural-based, including random forest, BERT, and large language models. Our experiments show a consistent and significant improvement, particularly in traditional classifiers, with a minimum performance boost of 45%. This study presents invaluable guidelines for refining the formulation of clarifying questions and enhancing both user satisfaction and system performance.

Crowdsourced labels play a crucial role in evaluating task-oriented dialogue systems (TDSs). Obtaining high-quality and consistent ground-truth labels from annotators presents challenges. When evaluating a TDS, annotators must fully comprehend the dialogue before providing judgments. Previous studies suggest using only a portion of the dialogue context in the annotation process. However, the impact of this limitation on label quality remains unexplored. This study investigates the influence of dialogue context on annotation quality, considering the truncated context for relevance and usefulness labeling. We further propose to use large language models ( LLMs) to summarize the dialogue context to provide a rich and short description of the dialogue context and study the impact of doing so on the annotator’s performance. Reducing context leads to more positive ratings. Conversely, providing the entire dialogue context yields higher-quality relevance ratings but introduces ambiguity in usefulness ratings. Using the first user utterance as context leads to consistent ratings, akin to those obtained using the entire dialogue, with significantly reduced annotation effort. Our findings show how task design, particularly the availability of dialogue context, affects the quality and consistency of crowdsourced evaluation labels.

An important unexplored aspect in previous work on user satisfaction estimation for Task-Oriented Dialogue (TOD) systems is their evaluation in terms of robustness for the identification of user dissatisfaction: current benchmarks for user satisfaction estimation in TOD systems are highly skewed towards dialogues for which the user is satisfied. The effect of having a more balanced set of satisfaction labels on performance is unknown. However, balancing the data with more dissatisfactory dialogue samples requires further data collection and human annotation, which is costly and time-consuming. In this work, we leverage large language models (LLMs) and unlock their ability to generate satisfaction-aware counterfactual dialogues to augment the set of original dialogues of a test collection. We gather human annotations to ensure the reliability of the generated samples. We evaluate two open-source LLMs as user satisfaction estimators on our augmented collection against state-of-the-art fine-tuned models. Our experiments show that when used as few-shot user satisfaction estimators, open-source LLMs show higher robustness to the increase in the number of dissatisfaction labels in the test collection than the fine-tuned state-of-the-art models. Our results shed light on the need for data augmentation approaches for user satisfaction estimation in TOD systems. We release our aligned counterfactual dialogues, which are curated by human annotation, to facilitate further research on this topic.

Large language models (LLMs) often produce unsupported or unverifiable content, known as “hallucinations.” To mitigate this, retrieval-augmented LLMs incorporate citations, grounding the content in verifiable sources. Despite such developments, manually assessing how well a citation supports the associated statement remains a major challenge. Previous studies use faithfulness metrics to estimate citation support automatically but are limited to binary classification, overlooking fine-grained citation support in practical scenarios. To investigate the effectiveness of faithfulness metrics in fine-grained scenarios, we propose a comparative evaluation framework that assesses the metric effectiveness in distinguishing citations between three-category support levels: full, partial, and no support. Our framework employs correlation analysis, classification evaluation, and retrieval evaluation to measure the alignment between metric scores and human judgments comprehensively. Our results show no single metric consistently excels across all evaluations, revealing the complexity of assessing fine-grained support. Based on the findings, we provide practical recommendations for developing more effective metrics.

Behavioral coding (BC) in motivational interviewing (MI) holds great potential for enhancing the efficacy of MI counseling. However, manual coding is labor-intensive, and automation efforts are hindered by the lack of data due to the privacy of psychotherapy. To address these challenges, we introduce BiMISC, a bilingual dataset of MI conversations in English and Dutch, sourced from real counseling sessions. Expert annotations in BiMISC adhere strictly to the motivational interviewing skills code (MISC) scheme, offering a pivotal resource for MI research. Additionally, we present a novel approach to elicit the MISC expertise from Large language models (LLMs) for MI coding. Through the in-depth analysis of BiMISC and the evaluation of our proposed approach, we demonstrate that the LLM-based approach yields results closely aligned with expert annotations and maintains consistent performance across different languages. Our contributions not only furnish the MI community with a valuable bilingual dataset but also spotlight the potential of LLMs in MI coding, laying the foundation for future MI research.

Generating synthetic training data based on large language models (LLMs) for ranking models has gained attention recently. Prior studies use LLMs to build pseudo query-document pairs by generating synthetic queries from documents in a corpus. In this paper, we propose a new perspective of data augmentation: generating synthetic documents from queries. To achieve this, we propose DocGen, that consists of a three-step pipeline that utilizes the few-shot capabilities of LLMs. DocGen pipeline performs synthetic document generation by (i) expanding, (ii) highlighting the original query, and then (iii) generating a synthetic document that is likely to be relevant to the query. To further improve the relevance between generated synthetic documents and their corresponding queries, we propose DocGen-RL, which regards the estimated relevance of the document as a reward and leverages reinforcement learning (RL) to optimize DocGen pipeline. Extensive experiments demonstrate that DocGen pipeline and DocGen-RL significantly outperform existing state-of-theart data augmentation methods, such as InPars, indicating that our new perspective of generating documents leverages the capacity of LLMs in generating synthetic data more effectively. We release the code, generated data, and model checkpoints to foster research in this area.

Enabling open-domain dialogue systems to ask clarifying questions when appropriate is an important direction for improving the quality of the system response. Namely, for cases when a user request is not specific enough for a conversation system to provide an answer right away, it is desirable to ask a clarifying question to increase the chances of retrieving a satisfying answer. To address the problem of ‘asking clarifying questions in open-domain dialogues’: (1) we collect and release a new dataset focused on open-domain single- and multi-turn conversations, (2) we benchmark several state-of-the-art neural baselines, and (3) we propose a pipeline consisting of offline and online steps for evaluating the quality of clarifying questions in various dialogues. These contributions are suitable as a foundation for further research.