TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you will be presented with a context from an academic paper and a question separated with a 
. You have to answer the question based on the context.
PROBLEM: We evaluated our models on 3 different datasets:

CSAT dataset for CSAT prediction, consisting of spoken transcripts (automatic via ASR).

20 newsgroups for topic identification task, consisting of written text;

Fisher Phase 1 corpus for topic identification task, consisting of spoken transcripts (manual); 
 Question: What datasets did they use for evaluation?

SOLUTION: CSAT dataset 20 newsgroups Fisher Phase 1 corpus

PROBLEM: To enable this, we use a bifocal attention mechanism which computes an attention over fields at a macro level and over values at a micro level. We then fuse these attention weights such that the attention weight for a field also influences the attention over the values within it. Fused Bifocal Attention Mechanism
Intuitively, when a human writes a description from a table she keeps track of information at two levels. At the macro level, it is important to decide which is the appropriate field to attend to next and at a micro level (i.e., within a field) it is important to know which values to attend to next. To capture this behavior, we use a bifocal attention mechanism as described below. Fused Attention: Intuitively, the attention weights assigned to a field should have an influence on all the values belonging to the particular field. To ensure this, we reweigh the micro level attention weights based on the corresponding macro level attention weights. In other words, we fuse the attention weights at the two levels as: DISPLAYFORM0

where INLINEFORM0 is the field corresponding to the INLINEFORM1 -th value, INLINEFORM2 is the macro level context vector. 
 Question: What is a bifocal attention mechanism?

SOLUTION: At the macro level, it is important to decide which is the appropriate field to attend to next micro level (i.e., within a field) it is important to know which values to attend to next fuse the attention weights at the two levels

PROBLEM: By analyzing large numbers of dialogue act sequences correlated with specific outcomes, various rules can be derived, i.e. "Continuing to request information late in a conversation often leads to customer dissatisfaction." This can then be codified into a best practice pattern rules for automated systems, such as "A request for information act should be issued early in a conversation, followed by an answer, informative statement, or apology towards the end of the conversation." Our analysis helps zone in on how the use of certain dialogue acts may be likely to result in different outcomes. The weights we observe vary in the amount of insight provided: for example, offering extra help at the end of a conversation, or thanking the customer yields more satisfied customers, and more resolved problems (with ratios of above 6:1). However, some outcomes are much more subtle: for example, asking yes-no questions early-on in a conversation is highly associated with problem resolution (ratio 3:1), but asking them at the end of a conversation has as similarly strong association with unsatisfied customers. Giving elaborate answers that are not a simple affirmative, negative, or response acknowledgement (i.e. Answer (Other)) towards the middle of a conversation leads to satisfied customers that are not frustrated. Likewise, requesting information towards the end of a conversation (implying that more information is still necessary at the termination of the dialogue) leads to unsatisfied and unresolved customers, with ratios of at least 4:1. 
 Question: Which patterns and rules are derived?

SOLUTION:
A request for information act should be issued early in a conversation, followed by an answer, informative statement, or apology towards the end of the conversation  offering extra help at the end of a conversation, or thanking the customer yields more satisfied customers, and more resolved problems  asking yes-no questions early-on in a conversation is highly associated with problem resolution (ratio 3:1), but asking them at the end of a conversation has as similarly strong association with unsatisfied customers Giving elaborate answers that are not a simple affirmative, negative, or response acknowledgement (i.e. Answer (Other)) towards the middle of a conversation leads to satisfied customers that are not frustrated requesting information towards the end of a conversation (implying that more information is still necessary at the termination of the dialogue) leads to unsatisfied and unresolved customers