End-to-End Transition-Based Online Dialogue Disentanglement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dialogue disentanglement aims to separate intermingled messages into detached sessions. The existing research focuses on two-step architectures, in which a model first retrieves the relationships between two messages and then divides the message stream into separate clusters. Almost all existing work puts significant efforts on selecting features for message-pair classification and clustering, while ignoring the semantic coherence within each session. In this paper, we introduce the first end-to- end transition-based model for online dialogue disentanglement. Our model captures the sequential information of each session as the online algorithm proceeds on processing a dialogue. The coherence in a session is hence modeled when messages are sequentially added into their best-matching sessions. Meanwhile, the research field still lacks data for studying end-to-end dialogue disentanglement, so we construct a large-scale dataset by extracting coherent dialogues from online movie scripts. We evaluate our model on both the dataset we developed and the publicly available Ubuntu IRC dataset [Kummerfeld et al., 2019]. The results show that our model significantly outperforms the existing algorithms. Further experiments demonstrate that our model better captures the sequential semantics and obtains more coherent disentangled sessions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".