Mohammad Aliannejadi

Clemencia Siro, Zahra Abbasiantaeb, Yifei Yuan et al.

Conversational search systems increasingly employ clarifying questions to refine user queries and improve the search experience. Previous studies have demonstrated the usefulness of text-based clarifying questions in enhancing both retrieval performance and user experience. While images have been shown to improve retrieval performance in various contexts, their impact on user performance when incorporated into clarifying questions remains largely unexplored. We conduct a user study with 73 participants to investigate the role of images in conversational search, specifically examining their effects on two search-related tasks: (i) answering clarifying questions and (ii) query reformulation. We compare the effect of multimodal and text-only clarifying questions in both tasks within a conversational search context from various perspectives. Our findings reveal that while participants showed a strong preference for multimodal questions when answering clarifying questions, preferences were more balanced in the query reformulation task. The impact of images varied with both task type and user expertise. In answering clarifying questions, images helped maintain engagement across different expertise levels, while in query reformulation they led to more precise queries and improved retrieval performance. Interestingly, for clarifying question answering, text-only setups demonstrated better user performance as they provided more comprehensive textual information in the absence of images. These results provide valuable insights for designing effective multimodal conversational search systems, highlighting that the benefits of visual augmentation are task-dependent and should be strategically implemented based on the specific search context and user characteristics.

Clemencia Siro, Pourya Aliannejadi, Mohammad Aliannejadi

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as evaluators for natural language generation, applying human-defined rubrics to assess system outputs. However, human rubrics are often static and misaligned with how models internally represent language quality. We introduce GER-Eval (Generating Evaluation Rubrics for Evaluation) to investigate whether LLMs can design and apply their own evaluation rubrics. We evaluate the semantic coherence and scoring reliability of LLM-defined criteria and their alignment with human criteria. LLMs reliably generate interpretable and task-aware evaluation dimensions and apply them consistently within models, but their scoring reliability degrades in factual and knowledge-intensive settings. Closed-source models such as GPT-4o achieve higher agreement and cross-model generalization than open-weight models such as Llama. Our findings position evaluation as a learned linguistic capability of LLMs, consistent within models but fragmented across them, and call for new methods that jointly model human and LLM evaluative language to improve reliability and interpretability.