Unsupervised Conversation Disentanglement through Co-Training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conversation disentanglement aims to separate intermingled messages into detached sessions, which is a fundamental task in understanding multi-party conversations. Existing work on conversation disentanglement relies heavily upon human-annotated datasets, which are expensive to obtain in practice. In this work, we explore to train a conversation disentanglement model without referencing any human annotations. Our method is built upon a deep co-training algorithm, which consists of two neural networks: a message-pair classifier and a session classifier. The former is responsible for retrieving local relations between two messages while the latter categorizes a message to a session by capturing context-aware information. Both networks are initialized respectively with pseudo data built from an unannotated corpus. During the deep co-training process, we use the session classifier as a reinforcement learning component to learn a session assigning policy by maximizing the local rewards given by the message-pair classifier. For the message-pair classifier, we enrich its training data by retrieving message pairs with high confidence from the disentangled sessions predicted by the session classifier. Experimental results on the large Movie Dialogue Dataset demonstrate that our proposed approach achieves competitive performance compared to the previous supervised methods. Further experiments show that the predicted disentangled conversations can promote the performance on the downstream task of multi-party response selection.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".