In this task, you are given a part of an article. Your task is to generate headline (title) for this text. Preferred headlines are under fifteen words.

Q: We investigate evaluation metrics for endto-end dialogue systems where supervised labels, such as task completion, are not available. Recent works in end-to-end dialogue systems have adopted metrics from machine translation and text summarization to compare a model’s generated response to a single target response. We show that these metrics correlate very weakly or not at all with human judgements of the response quality in both technical and non-technical domains. We provide quantitative and qualitative results highlighting specific weaknesses in existing metrics, and provide recommendations for future development of better automatic evaluation metrics for dialogue systems.

A: How NOT To Evaluate Your Dialogue System: An Empirical Study of Unsupervised Evaluation Metrics for Dialogue Response Generation
****
Q: Visual representation is crucial for a visual tracking method’s performances. Conventionally, visual representations adopted in visual tracking rely on hand-crafted computer vision descriptors. These descriptors were developed generically without considering tracking-specific information. In this paper, we propose to learn complex-valued invariant representations from tracked sequential image patches, via strong temporal slowness constraint and stacked convolutional autoencoders. The deep slow local representations are learned offline on unlabeled data and transferred to the observational model of our proposed tracker. The proposed observational model retains old training samples to alleviate drift, and collect negative samples which are coherent with target’s motion pattern for better discriminative tracking. With the learned representation and online training samples, a logistic regression classifier is adopted to distinguish target from background, and retrained online to adapt to appearance changes. Subsequently, the observational model is integrated into a particle filter framework to peform visual tracking. Experimental results on various challenging benchmark sequences demonstrate that the proposed tracker performs favourably against several state-of-the-art trackers.

A: Self-taught learning of a deep invariant representation for visual tracking via temporal slowness principle
****
Q: This paper investigates the validity of Kleinberg’s axioms for clustering functions with respect to the quite popular clustering algorithm called k-means.We suggest that the reason why this algorithm does not fit Kleinberg’s axiomatic system stems from missing match between informal intuitions and formal formulations of the axioms. While Kleinberg’s axioms have been discussed heavily in the past, we concentrate here on the case predominantly relevant for k-means algorithm, that is behavior embedded in Euclidean space. We point at some contradictions and counter intuitiveness aspects of this axiomatic set within R that were evidently not discussed so far. Our results suggest that apparently without defining clearly what kind of clusters we expect we will not be able to construct a valid axiomatic system. In particular we look at the shape and the gaps between the clusters. Finally we demonstrate that there exist several ways to reconcile the formulation of the axioms with their intended meaning and that under this reformulation the axioms stop to be contradictory and the real-world k-means algorithm conforms to this axiomatic system.

A:
On the Discrepancy Between Kleinberg’s Clustering Axioms and k-Means Clustering Algorithm Behavior
****