Papers › Sampling Matters! An Empirical Study of Negative Sampling Strategies for Learning of...

Sampling Matters! An Empirical Study of Negative Sampling Strategies for Learning of Matching Models in Retrieval-based Dialogue Systems

1 Nov 2019IJCNLP 2019 11archive 2025-07-28

Jia Li, Chongyang Tao, Wei Wu, Yansong Feng, Dongyan Zhao, Rui Yan

We study how to sample negative examples to automatically construct a training set for effective model learning in retrieval-based dialogue systems. Following an idea of dynamically adapting negative examples to matching models in learning, we consider four strategies including minimum sampling, maximum sampling, semi-hard sampling, and decay-hard sampling. Empirical studies on two benchmarks with three matching models indicate that compared with the widely used random sampling strategy, although the first two strategies lead to performance drop, the latter two ones can bring consistent improvement to the performance of all the models on both benchmarks.

PaperPDF

Code

No code repository is listed for this paper in the archive or in Syntology's graph.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Conversational Response SelectionRetrieval

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

TaskDatasetModelMetricValueRank at snapshotLeaderboardReport
Conversational Response Selection Ubuntu Dialogue (v1, Ranking) DAM-Semi R10@1 0.785 #18 of 25 Archive leaderboard report
Conversational Response Selection Ubuntu Dialogue (v1, Ranking) DAM-Semi R10@2 0.883 #18 of 25 Archive leaderboard report
Conversational Response Selection Ubuntu Dialogue (v1, Ranking) DAM-Semi R10@5 0.974 #18 of 25 Archive leaderboard report
Conversational Response Selection Ubuntu Dialogue (v1, Ranking) DAM-Semi R2@1 0.944 #18 of 25 Archive leaderboard report

Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections