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.
Insightfulness: Is the response creative, original or novel, including new perspectives or interpretations of existing information?
Score 1: The response is overly simplistic, lacking any originality or novelty.
Score 2: The ideas or perspectives within the response are commonplace, demonstrating a lack of originality or novelty.
Score 3: Some may perceive the response as original and novel, but others may find it ordinary or uninspiring.
Score 4: The response includes some innovative perspectives or ideas that require thoughtful consideration, yet they aren't particularly surprising.
Score 5: The response is infused with surprisingly creative perspectives or ideas that are challenging to conceive, showcasing significant originality and novelty.
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.
[Instruction]
write about the strangest/scariest/saddest dream you 've ever had in less than 200 words .

[Ground truth Answer]
The night was as thick and terrifying as any I had ever seen before . All I could hear was the scream of the wind past my ears , the pounding of hooves , huffed horse breaths , and the pounding of my own heart . <newline> <newline> The woods were closeknit , and my path was barely visible , hidden under a thick layer of bracken . <newline> <newline> `` Faster , '' I whispered as I dug my heels in . Safety was close and yet so far away , calling to me . He would save me ; I knew it with all my heart . <newline> <newline> All I had to do was outrun the demons at my back first .

[Assistant's Response]
One of the strangest dreams I ever had took place in a dimly lit forest. As I wandered through the trees, they seemed to whisper my name, and an eerie fog hung in the air. Shadows danced at the edge of my vision. Suddenly, I stumbled upon a clearing where a giant clock stood, its hands spinning wildly. As I approached, the clock began to chime, and with each toll, a wave of sadness washed over me.

In that moment, I saw the faces of people I had lost, their expressions a mix of sorrow and longing. I reached out to them, but they faded away like smoke. The dream left me with a heavy heart, as if I was grappling with the passage of time and the inevitability of loss. When I woke up, the feeling lingered, reminding me of the fragility of life and the importance of cherishing every moment. It was a dream that, while unsettling, taught me a profound lesson about the connections we hold dear.

[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: