Evaluates a model's ability to perform dialogue user request summarization, specifically extracting and condensing a user's intent and key constraints from a multi-turn task-oriented conversation into a single paragraph. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ToQB (Task-oriented Queries Benchmark), or asks about evaluating this task. Reports key_slot_verification.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill toqb-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Toqb Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-toqb-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: toqb-eval
description: Evaluates a model's ability to perform dialogue user request summarization, specifically extracting and condensing a user's intent and key constraints from a multi-turn task-oriented conversation into a single paragraph. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ToQB (Task-oriented Queries Benchmark), or asks about evaluating this task. Reports key_slot_verification.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2406.02943
bibtex_key: yim2024toqb
confidence: medium
---
# toqb-eval
> The Task-oriented Queries Benchmark (ToQB) — Yim et al. (2024) (arXiv:2406.02943, 2024)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates a model's ability to perform dialogue user request summarization, specifically extracting and condensing a user's intent and key constraints from a multi-turn task-oriented conversation into a single paragraph.
## Datasets
- **ToQB (Task-oriented Queries Benchmark)** — total 2922; splits: test (-1); repo https://github.com/google/task-oriented-queries
## Metrics
- `key_slot_verification` **(primary)** — range: other
- Automatic verification checks whether key slots from the original dialogue annotations are correctly captured in the generated summary. Manual reviewers cross-check annotations and identify hallucinations for unsuccessful responses. Lexical, syntactic, and semantic analyses are also conducted on the final dataset.
## Input / output format
**Input**: A sequence of transcribed user and system utterances representing a task-oriented dialogue, optionally accompanied by domain and key slot annotations.
**Output**: A one-paragraph summary capturing the user's request, intent, and key constraints (e.g., locations, times, conditional preferences).
## Scoring recipe
```python
def evaluate(dialogue, summary, annotations):
# 1. Extract key slots from dialogue annotations
slots = extract_slots(annotations)
# 2. Verify key slots are correctly summarized
slot_match = verify_slots_in_text(summary, slots)
# 3. Check for hallucinations using dedicated tools
hallucination = detect_hallucinations(summary)
# 4. Manual review for unsuccessful responses
if hallucination or not slot_match:
return 'unsuccessful'
return 'successful'
```
## Common pitfalls
- Summaries may incorrectly include system responses or situational context instead of focusing solely on the user's intent.
- Conditional user requests (e.g., fallback preferences) are often oversimplified or lost in the summary.
- Automatic slot verification fails if the original dialogue lacks explicit annotations.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> The automatic verifications are conducted if and only if the annotations extracted from the input dialogue data are available. Using the annotations, automatic verifications, for example, check whether the key slots are correctly summarized in given responses [31]. The manual reviewers can also utilize the annotations to expedite the cross-checking and classification processes. The manual reviewers are responsible for identifying hallucinations for unsuccessful responses.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{yim2024toqb,
title={The Task-oriented Queries Benchmark (ToQB)},
author={Yim et al. (2024)},
year={2024},
note={arXiv:2406.02943}
}
```
- arXiv: 2406.02943
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!