Traditional topic modeling treats each document as a single, coherent unit of topic, which can cause topic contamination when documents cover multiple topics. This becomes especially problematic when stakeholders are interested in identifying documents that focus on a specific topic. We introduce segment-based topic allocation, a novel paradigm that redefines topic assignment at the level of segments, coherent textual spans conveying distinct topical content. This granularity improves topic purity, interpretability, and applicability to multi-theme corpora such as reviews or survey responses. To support this paradigm, we construct SemEval-STM, a benchmark derived from aspect-based sentiment datasets, where segments are automatically extracted using large language models (LLMs) and post-processed with human supervision. We further propose the segment intrusion task (SIT), a novel evaluation method extending word intrusion to the span level, enabling human-centric assessment of topical coherence. Empirical results across diverse metrics and models demonstrate that SBTA significantly outperforms traditional document-based methods in clustering and interpretability. Our framework provides a practical and scalable solution for fine-grained topic analysis in heterogeneous text corpora.

The primary purpose of dialogue state tracking(DST), a critical component of an end-toend conversational system, is to build a model that responds well to real-world situations. Although we often change our minds from time to time during ordinary conversations, current benchmark datasets do not adequately reflect such occurrences and instead consist of over-simplified conversations, in which no one changes their mind during a conversation. As the main question inspiring the present study, “Are current benchmark datasets sufficiently diverse to handle casual conversations in which one changes their mind after a certain topic is over?” We found that the answer is “No” because DST models cannot refer to previous user preferences when template-based turnback utterances are injected into the dataset. Even in the the simplest mind-changing (turnback) scenario, the performance of DST models significantly degenerated. However, we found that this performance degeneration can be recovered when the turnback scenarios are explicitly designed in the training set, implying that the problem is not with the DST models but rather with the construction of the benchmark dataset.

Dialogue state tracking (DST) aims to extract essential information from multi-turn dialog situations and take appropriate actions. A belief state, one of the core pieces of information, refers to the subject and its specific content, and appears in the form of domain-slot-value. The trained model predicts “accumulated” belief states in every turn, and joint goal accuracy and slot accuracy are mainly used to evaluate the prediction; however, we specify that the current evaluation metrics have a critical limitation when evaluating belief states accumulated as the dialogue proceeds, especially in the most used MultiWOZ dataset. Additionally, we propose relative slot accuracy to complement existing metrics. Relative slot accuracy does not depend on the number of predefined slots, and allows intuitive evaluation by assigning relative scores according to the turn of each dialog. This study also encourages not solely the reporting of joint goal accuracy, but also various complementary metrics in DST tasks for the sake of a realistic evaluation.