instruction:
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.
question:
In total around 500 different workers were involved in the annotation. about 500 
 Question: How many people participated in their evaluation study of table-to-text models?
answer:
about 500


question:
In our methodology to design new evaluation metrics for comparing reference summaries/translations to hypothesis ones, we established first-principles criteria on what a good evaluator should do. The first one is that it should be highly correlated with human judgement of similarity. The second one is that it should be able to distinguish sentences which are in logical contradiction, logically unrelated or in logical agreement. The third one is that a robust evaluator should also be able to identify unintelligible sentences. The last criteria is that a good evaluation metric should not give high scores to semantically distant sentences and low scores to semantically related sentences. 
 Question: What is the criteria for a good metric?
answer:
The first one is that it should be highly correlated with human judgement of similarity. The second one is that it should be able to distinguish sentences which are in logical contradiction, logically unrelated or in logical agreement. The third one is that a robust evaluator should also be able to identify unintelligible sentences. The last criteria is that a good evaluation metric should not give high scores to semantically distant sentences and low scores to semantically related sentences.


question:
Table TABREF23 shows the unlabeled INLINEFORM0 scores for our models and various baselines. 
 Question: what were the evaluation metrics?
answer:

INLINEFORM0 scores