arXiv Computation and Language

PragAlign: Feedback-Guided Pragmatic Alignment for Controlled Synthetic Dialogue Generation

PragAlign is a feedback‑guided framework that improves synthetic dialogue generation by iteratively generating, evaluating, and revising conversations to meet specified service context, target intent, and target emotion. Using an LLM‑based evaluator that scores intent alignment, emotion alignment, coherence, fluency, and overall quality, PragAlign achieves a 99.50% acceptance rate on 800 dialogue specifications, outperforming one‑shot and repeated generation without feedback. Human evaluation confirms that intent expression and dialogue flow are reliably recognized, while emotion appropriateness remains more variable.

arXiv Computation and Language
4d ago

CALM-IT: Enhancing Synthetic Motivational Interviewing Dialogue Quality with Conversational Dynamics

arXiv:2601.10085v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Conversational dynamics describe how rapport, emotion, and goals change over a dialogue. These changes are important in therapeutic conversations,...

By Viet Cuong Nguyen, Nhi Yen Nguyen, Kristin A. Candan, Mary Conlon, Vanessa Rumie, Kristen Risola, Michael L. Birnbaum, Munmun De Choudhury
arXiv AI
Jul 15

Operationalising Multi-Dimensional Evaluation for Conversational Agents: A Scalable, Governed Pipeline with Selective Re-evaluation and Model Benchmarking

arXiv:2607. 12085v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating retail conversational agents requires methods beyond lexical-overlap metrics to assess intent alignment, factuality, helpfulness, clarity, tone, and overall response quality.

By Niranjan Kumar M, Balaji Nagarajan, Karthik Nair, Faysal Satter, Nithin Surendran
arXiv AI
Jul 21

Toward Anthropomorphic Dialogue: A Closed-Loop Framework for Human-Like Chat Generation, Evaluation, and Preference Alignment

arXiv:2607. 17191v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Human-like private chat requires more than fluent response generation: a system must preserve persona, relationship, memory, bounded knowledge, medium-specific timing, and a coherent multi-turn arc.

By Wentao Liu, Siyu Song, Xi Chen, Youjia Li, Xiaokun Wang, Min Ji, Ji Wang
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 28

Evaluating Language Models in Realistic Conversational Contexts

The paper introduces UPHELD, a large benchmark of human-to-human dialogues written by professional script writers, featuring realistic turn densities and over 36,000 per-turn human annotations. It evaluates existing automatic metrics and LLM-as-a-judge methods, finding them unreliable against expert human judgment. Using UPHELD, the authors develop a Mixture-of-Judges framework that improves correlation with human assessments by about 30%.

By Ilija Subasic, Andrew Rabinovich, Zhao Chen
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 6

SPEARBench: A Benchmark for Naturalness Evaluation in Streaming Speech-to-Speech Language Models

Streaming speech-to-speech language models aim to answer spoken queries directly with synthetic speech. However, standard speech and text benchmarks do not capture whether these systems behave naturally in conversations, where timing, turn-taking, prosody, interpersonal stance, language and dialect consistency, and relationship-aware appropriateness jointly shape perceived quality.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 3

A Tri-Agent Framework for Evaluating and Aligning Question Clarification Capabilities of Large Language Models

The paper presents a tri‑agent framework for evaluating large language models’ question‑clarification abilities. It involves a Question Clarifying Agent that identifies ambiguities and asks follow‑up questions, a Respondent Agent that simulates human replies, and an Evaluator Agent that judges the dialogue using metrics such as ambiguity handling, question quality, dialogue efficiency, language appropriateness, and intent alignment. The authors illustrate the approach with synthetic supply‑chain data and discuss validating the evaluator against human judgments.

By Yikai Zhao, Saurabh Pandey, Pradeep Kumar Misra
arXiv AI
3d ago

DialFork: Going Beyond Factuality to Evaluate Procedural Hallucination in Conversational Agents

DialFork is a new benchmark that evaluates procedural hallucination in conversational agents, a failure mode where agents produce fluent, factually plausible utterances but deviate from the intended dialogue process. The benchmark consists of 36,278 dialogues across 24 tasks in 12 domains, created by forking conformant dialogues and injecting one of four hallucination types, with validation by 30 human annotators. Three evaluation tasks are defined—monitoring overall deviation, procedural retrieval of a single dialogue, and real‑time detection of off‑track turns—using dialog‑flow‑aware metrics FlowKL and FlowScore, which outperform baseline semantic similarity metrics.

By Sergio Burdisso, Esa\'u Villatoro-Tello, Dairazalia S\'anchez-Cort\'es, Yanis Labrak, Jordi Luque, Milos Cernak, Petr Motlicek