System: You are a helpful and precise assistant in checking the quality of the answer.
User: We would like to request your feedback on the performance of the response of the assistant to the user instruction displayed below. In the feedback, I want you to rate the quality of the response in these 3 categories according to each scoring rubric:

Readability: Is the response structured to promote readability and coherence? Does the response exhibit excellent organization?
Score 1: The response is completely unclear, making comprehension difficult.
Score 2: The response has significant areas of ambiguity or disorganization, critically affecting reader comprehension.
Score 3: The response contains some unclear components, or its organization could be improved.
Score 4: The response is generally understandable but could be further optimized for readability.
Score 5: The response is clear and well-organized, enabling the reader to effortlessly follow the content.
Completeness: Does the response provide a sufficient explanation? Comprehensiveness and thoroughness of the response should be considered, which depends on the breadth of topics covered and the level of detail provided within each topic.
Score 1: The response doesn't include any specifics or examples to support the statements made.
Score 2: The response does not provide sufficient details or supportive examples, requiring a major effort to make the response more complete.
Score 3: It is a decent response, but the breadth and depth of the response are rather limited. The details and examples used to substantiate the response may be insufficient.
Score 4: The response provides detailed explanations, but there is room for enhancement. The response could be further improved by including more details and supportive examples.
Score 5: The response fully provides comprehensive explanations. It delves deep into the topic, providing as much detail as possible, and it offers several examples to back up its points.
Comprehension: Does the response fulfill the requirements of the instruction by providing relevant information especially when the instruction is complex and includes multiple requirements? This includes responding in accordance with the explicit and implicit purpose of given instruction.
Score 1: The response is completely unrelated to the instruction, or the model entirely misunderstands the instruction.
Score 2: Most of the key points in the response are irrelevant to the instruction, and the response misses major requirements of the instruction.
Score 3: Some major points in the response contain irrelevant information or miss some requirements of the instruction.
Score 4: The response is relevant to the instruction but misses minor requirements of the instruction.
Score 5: The response is perfectly relevant to the instruction, and the model fulfills all of the requirements of the instruction.
[Instruction]
You should inspect the role of each sentence in the given long-form answer for the question. The role is one of 'Organizational sentence', 'Auxiliary Information', 'Answer', 'Example', and 'Miscellaneous'. The Organizational sentence is to inform the reader how the answer will be structured. The Auxiliary Information provides information that are related to what is discussed in the answer, but not asked in the question. The Answer is an answer sentence directly addresses the question. The Example is literally example sentence to give better understanding. The Miscellaneous contains all other sentences.\n\nQuestion: Olympics are almost never profitable, why would countries spend billions on it?\n\nLong-form Answer:\n\nNational pride is huge. And it's easy to sell it as a big, world shaping event. \n\nWhen done well, it can be profitable, but few places do it well. \n\nToss in a good dose of bribes and political pandering and you've got yourself a recipe for economic disturbances of olympic proportions.

[Ground truth Answer]
Answer, Answer, Answer, Auxiliary Information

[Assistant's Response]
Claro, aquí tienes el análisis de cada oración en la respuesta larga proporcionada:

1. **"National pride is huge."** - **Auxiliary Information**: Esta oración proporciona un contexto sobre la importancia del orgullo nacional, que está relacionado con la pregunta, pero no la responde directamente.

2. **"And it's easy to sell it as a big, world shaping event."** - **Auxiliary Information**: Similar a la anterior, esta oración ofrece información adicional sobre cómo se perciben los Juegos Olímpicos, pero no responde a la pregunta.

3. **"When done well, it can be profitable, but few places do it well."** - **Answer**: Esta oración aborda directamente la pregunta al mencionar que, aunque los Juegos Olímpicos pueden ser rentables, no muchos lugares logran hacerlo de esa manera.

4. **"Toss in a good dose of bribes and political pandering and you’ve got yourself a recipe for economic disturbances of olympic proportions."** - **Example**: Esta oración proporciona un ejemplo de los factores que pueden influir en la economía de los Juegos Olímpicos, ilustrando cómo la corrupción y la política pueden afectar el resultado.

Si necesitas más información o un análisis más detallado, ¡no dudes en preguntar!

[The End of Assistant's Response]

Please give feedback on the assistant's responses. Also, provide the assistant with a score on a scale of 1 to 5 for each category, where a higher score indicates better overall performance. Make sure to give feedback or comments for each category first and then write the score for each category. Only write the feedback corresponding to the scoring rubric for each category. The scores of each category should be orthogonal, indicating that 'Efficiency of User Alignment' should not be considered for 'Readability of User Alignment' category, for example. 

Lastly, return a Python dictionary object that has skillset names as keys and the corresponding scores as values.

[System]



Assistant: