Papers › Section-Aware Commonsense Knowledge-Grounded Dialogue Generation with Pre-trained...
Section-Aware Commonsense Knowledge-Grounded Dialogue Generation with Pre-trained Language Model
Sixing Wu, Ying Li, Ping Xue, Dawei Zhang, Zhonghai Wu
In knowledge-grounded dialogue generation, pre-trained language models (PLMs) can be expected to deepen the fusing of dialogue context and knowledge because of their superior ability of semantic understanding. Unlike adopting the plain text knowledge, it is thorny to leverage the structural commonsense knowledge when using PLMs because most PLMs can only operate plain texts. Thus, linearizing commonsense knowledge facts into plan text is a compulsory trick. However, a dialogue is always aligned to a lot of retrieved fact candidates; as a result, the linearized text is always lengthy and then significantly increases the burden of using PLMs. To address this issue, we propose a novel two-stage framework SAKDP. In the first pre-screening stage, we use a ranking network PriorRanking to estimate the relevance of a retrieved knowledge fact. Thus, facts can be clustered into three sections of different priorities. As priority decreases, the relevance decreases, and the number of included facts increases. In the next dialogue generation stage, we use section-aware strategies to encode the linearized knowledge. The powerful but expensive PLM is only used for a few facts in the higher priority sections, reaching the performance-efficiency balance. Both the automatic and human evaluation demonstrate the superior performance of this work.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
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