DialogBench: Evaluating LLMs as Human-like Dialogue Systems

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable breakthroughs in new dialogue capabilities, refreshing human's impressions on dialogue systems. The long-standing goal of dialogue systems is to be human-like enough to establish long-term connections with users by satisfying the need for communication, affection and social belonging. Therefore, there has been an urgent need to evaluate LLMs as human-like dialogue systems. In this paper, we propose DialogBench, a dialogue evaluation benchmark that currently contains $12$ dialogue tasks to assess the capabilities of LLMs as human-like dialogue systems should have. Specifically, we prompt GPT-4 to generate evaluation instances for each task. We first design the basic prompt based on widely-used design principles and further mitigate the existing biases to generate higher-quality evaluation instances. Our extensive test over $28$ LLMs (including pre-trained and supervised instruction-tuning) shows that instruction fine-tuning benefits improve the human likeness of LLMs to a certain extent, but there is still much room to improve those capabilities for most LLMs as human-like dialogue systems. In addition, experimental results also indicate that LLMs perform differently in various abilities that human-like dialogue systems should have. We will publicly release DialogBench, along with the associated evaluation code for the broader research community.