mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Evaluation Metrics of Language Generation Models for Synthetic Traffic Generation Tasks

arXiv 2311.12534 ↗First posted 21 Nov 2023cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Many Natural Language Generation (NLG) tasks aim to generate a single output text given an input prompt. Other settings require the generation of multiple texts, e.g., for Synthetic Traffic Generation (STG). This generation task is crucial for training and evaluating QA systems as well as conversational agents, where the goal is to generate multiple questions or utterances resembling the linguistic variability of real users. In this paper, we show that common NLG metrics, like BLEU, are not suitable for evaluating STG. We propose and evaluate several metrics designed to compare the generated traffic to the distribution of real user texts. We validate our metrics with an automatic procedure to verify whether they capture different types of quality issues of generated data; we also run human annotations to verify the correlation with human judgements. Experiments on three tasks, i.e., Shopping Utterance Generation, Product Question Generation and Query Auto Completion, demonstrate that our metrics are effective for evaluating STG tasks, and improve the agreement with human judgement up to 20% with respect to common NLG metrics. We believe these findings can pave the way towards better solutions for estimating the representativeness of synthetic text data.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Nov 2023.

Builds on

16 of 29 references.

References · 16

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,599
  3. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
  4. 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,893
  5. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
  6. 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,916
  7. 2014CIDEr: Consensus-based Image Description Evaluationcited by 2,046
  8. 2020BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generationcited by 1,203
  9. 2019EDA: Easy Data Augmentation Techniques for Boosting Performance on Text Classification Taskscited by 807
  10. 2019MoverScore: Text Generation Evaluating with Contextualized Embeddings and Earth Mover Distancecited by 418
  11. 2021A Survey of Data Augmentation Approaches for NLPcited by 409
  12. 2020Evaluation of Text Generation: A Surveycited by 277
4 more
  1. 2018Pros and Cons of GAN Evaluation Measurescited by 224
  2. 2017Survey of the State of the Art in Natural Language Generation: Core tasks, applications and evaluationcited by 206
  3. 2020A Set of Recommendations for Assessing Human-Machine Parity in Language Translationcited by 34
  4. 2021Answering Product-Questions by Utilizing Questions from Other Contextually Similar Productscited by 12

Built on by

Not cited yet.