Reference-based metrics such as BLEU and BERTScore are widely used to evaluate question generation (QG). In this study, on QG benchmarks such as SQuAD and HotpotQA, we find that using human-written references cannot guarantee the effectiveness of the reference-based metrics. Most QG benchmarks have only one reference; we replicated the annotation process and collect another reference. A good metric was expected to grade a human-validated question no worse than generated questions. However, the results of reference-based metrics on our newly collected reference disproved the metrics themselves. We propose a reference-free metric consisted of multi-dimensional criteria such as naturalness, answerability, and complexity, utilizing large language models. These criteria are not constrained to the syntactic or semantic of a single reference question, and the metric does not require a diverse set of references. Experiments reveal that our metric accurately distinguishes between high-quality questions and flawed ones, and achieves state-of-the-art alignment with human judgment.
This study explores the impact of AI-generated digital self-clones on improving online presentation skills. We carried out a mixed-design experiment involving 44 international students, comparing self-recorded videos (control) with self-clone videos (AI group) for English presentation practice. The AI videos utilized voice cloning, face swapping, lip-sync, and body-language simulation to refine participants' original presentations in terms of repetition, filler words, and pronunciation. Machine-rated scores indicated enhancements in speech performance for both groups. Though the groups didn't significantly differ, the AI group exhibited a heightened depth of reflection, self-compassion, and a meaningful transition from a corrective to an enhancive approach to self-critique. Within the AI group, congruence between self-perception and AI self-clones resulted in diminished speech anxiety and increased enjoyment. Our findings recommend the ethical employment of digital self-clones to enhance the emotional and cognitive facets of skill development.
This empirical study serves as a primer for interested service providers to determine if and how Large Language Models (LLMs) technology will be integrated for their practitioners and the broader community. We investigate the mutual learning journey of non-AI experts and AI through CoAGent, a service co-creation tool with LLM-based agents. Engaging in a three-stage participatory design processes, we work with with 23 domain experts from public libraries across the U.S., uncovering their fundamental challenges of integrating AI into human workflows. Our findings provide 23 actionable "heuristics for service co-creation with AI", highlighting the nuanced shared responsibilities between humans and AI. We further exemplar 9 foundational agency aspects for AI, emphasizing essentials like ownership, fair treatment, and freedom of expression. Our innovative approach enriches the participatory design model by incorporating AI as crucial stakeholders and utilizing AI-AI interaction to identify blind spots. Collectively, these insights pave the way for synergistic and ethical human-AI co-creation in service contexts, preparing for workforce ecosystems where AI coexists.