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:

Factuality: Did the model extract pertinent and accurate background knowledge without any misinformation when factual knowledge retrieval is needed? Is the response supported by reliable evidence or citation of the source of its information?
Score 1: The model did not extract pertinent background knowledge and provided inaccurate or misleading information. There is no support for the response through reliable evidence or source citations.
Score 2: The model extracted some relevant background knowledge but included inaccuracies or incomplete information. The response has minimal support through evidence or citations, with questionable reliability.
Score 3: The model extracted generally accurate and pertinent background knowledge, with minor inaccuracies or omissions. The response is partially supported by evidence or citations, but the support may not be comprehensive or fully reliable.
Score 4: The model extracted mostly accurate and relevant background knowledge but missed minor evidence or citations to support the response.
Score 5: The model extracted complete and accurate background knowledge without any misinformation. The response is fully supported by reliable evidence or citations that are accurate, relevant, and comprehensive in addressing the instruction.
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.
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]
Discuss the origins and history of the word that has been given to you.
Input: oblique

[Ground truth Answer]
Middle English oblique, oblike, borrowed from Anglo-French oblic, oblique, borrowed from Latin oblīquus "slanting, transverse," from ob- "against, facing" + -līquus, of uncertain meaning and origin

[Assistant's Response]
The word "oblique" has a fascinating etymology and a rich history that reflects its diverse applications in language and various fields. It originates from the Latin word "obliquus," which means "slanting" or "slope." This Latin term is composed of the prefix "ob-" meaning "against" or "toward," and "liques," related to the verb "liquere," meaning "to be liquid" or "to flow." This combination suggests a notion of something that is not straightforward or direct.

The term "oblique" made its way into the English language during the late Middle Ages, around the 14th century, through Old French "oblique," which preserved the original Latin meaning. Initially, its usage spanned various contexts, including geometry, where it referred to angles that are not right angles, and in literature, where it described indirect or evasive language.

Over the centuries, "oblique" has evolved to encompass a wide range of meanings. In modern contexts, it can describe anything that is slanted or not straightforward, whether in a physical sense (such as an oblique line) or in figurative language (like an oblique reference or approach to a topic). Additionally, in anatomy, the term refers to certain muscles that are positioned at an angle to the body's midline, highlighting its versatility across different disciplines.

In summary, the word "oblique" has a rich historical background rooted in Latin, and its meanings have expanded over time to cover various applications in geometry, literature, and anatomy, reflecting its enduring relevance in contemporary language.

[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: