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:

Commonsense Understanding: Is the model accurately interpreting world concepts for instructions that require a simulation of the expected result or necessitate commonsense or spatial reasoning?
Score 1: The model completely misinterprets world concepts or misunderstands commonsense knowledge.
Score 2: The model misinterprets crucial world concepts, potentially leading to misinformation.
Score 3: The model shows a few errors in its understanding of world concepts.
Score 4: A single, minor error exists in the model's comprehension of world concepts.
Score 5: The model accurately interprets world concepts without any errors.
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.
Conciseness: Is the response presented in a concise manner for the reader without any unnecessary information?
Score 1: The response is highly redundant or contains a lot of unnecessary information, requiring a complete rewrite for optimal clarity and efficiency.
Score 2: The response lacks conciseness and needs a substantial rewrite for better optimization.
Score 3: The response is somewhat concise but includes unnecessary information, requiring some edits for improved optimization.
Score 4: The response is mostly concise but could benefit from minor edits for better optimization.
Score 5: The response is optimally concise and does not contain any unnecessary information, requiring no further optimization.
[Instruction]
Try to identify the 4 words best associated with the word DRIVE-IN from the following list: locust, fever, street, sherwood, kiss, popcorn, craft, ant, crystal, tear, cowboy, government, pine, mountie, soap, genie, king arthur, sphinx, director, bride, razor, fog, whistle. Give your answer in alphabetical order.

[Ground truth Answer]
director, kiss, popcorn, street

[Assistant's Response]
To identify the four words best associated with "DRIVE-IN" from the provided list, we can consider the context of drive-in theaters and the cultural elements typically associated with them. The words that stand out from the list are:

1. **Cowboy** - Often associated with classic drive-in movies, particularly Westerns.
2. **Kiss** - Represents the romantic or intimate experiences often depicted in films shown at drive-ins.
3. **Popcorn** - A quintessential snack that is synonymous with movie watching, including at drive-in theaters.
4. **Sphinx** - While less directly related, it could refer to the mystery or intrigue often found in films, or possibly to specific movies that may have been featured.

In alphabetical order, the selected words are:

1. Cowboy
2. Kiss
3. Popcorn
4. Sphinx

These words encapsulate both the experience and the cultural references tied to drive-in theaters.

[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: