MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098826124 · doi:10.1109/taslp.2024.3426331

Overview of the Ninth Dialog System Technology Challenge: DSTC9

2024· article· en· W3098826124 on OpenAlexaff
Chulaka Gunasekara, Seokhwan Kim, Luis Fernando D’Haro, Yun-Nung Chen, Mihail Eric, Behnam Hedayatnia, Karthik Gopalakrishnan, Yang Liu, Chao-Wei Huang, Dilek Hakkani‐Tür, Jinchao Li, Qi Zhu, Lingxiao Luo, Lars Lidén, Kaili Huang, Shahin Shayandeh, Runze Liang, Baolin Peng, Zheng Zhang, Swadheen Shukla, Minlie Huang, Jianfeng Gao, Shikib Mehri, Yulan Feng, Carla Gordon, Seyed Hossein Alavi, David Traum, Maxine Eskénazi, Ahmad Beirami, Eunjoon Cho, Paul Crook, Ankita De, Alborz Geramifard, Satwik Kottur, Seungwhan Moon, Shivani Poddar, Rajen Subba

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio Speech and Language Processing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and dialogue systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialog boxComputer scienceTask (project management)Dialog systemDomain (mathematical analysis)Set (abstract data type)Human–computer interactionNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceMultimediaWorld Wide WebProgramming languageEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces the Ninth Dialog System Technology Challenge (DSTC-9). This edition of the DSTC focuses on applying end-to-end dialog technologies for four distinct tasks in dialog systems, namely, 1. Task-oriented dialog Modeling with Unstructured Knowledge Access, 2. Multi-domain task-oriented dialog, 3. Interactive evaluation of dialog and 4. Situated interactive multimodal dialog. This paper describes the task definition, provided datasets, baselines, and evaluation setup for each track. We also summarize the results of the submitted systems to highlight the general trends of the state-of-the-art technologies for the tasks.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0090.014
Open science0.0060.011
Research integrity0.0060.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.020

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio Speech and Language ProcessingSame topicSpeech and dialogue systemsFrench-language works237,207