The paper introduces CoCoEval, a framework for evaluating large language model (LLM)–simulated conversations by detecting 10 types of inconsistent and uncollaborative behaviors at the turn level. Using CoCoEval, the authors compare human conversations with those generated by GPT‑4.1, GPT‑5.1, and Claude Opus 4, finding that LLMs produce far fewer such behaviors under vanilla prompting and that prompt engineering or fine‑tuning often over‑produces specific behaviors. The study highlights gaps between human and LLM‑simulated interactions that conventional Likert‑scale evaluations miss, raising concerns about using LLMs as proxies for human social interaction.
arXiv:2606. 18258v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) exhibit a wide range of human-like behaviors, from expressing thoughts and emotions, to engaging in relationship-building with users, to refusing requests and maintaining boundaries.
arXiv:2603. 16859v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Omni-modal large language models (OLMs) redefine human-machine interaction by natively integrating audio, vision, and text.
arXiv:2601.12208v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Evaluating conversational systems in multi-turn settings remains a fundamental challenge. Conventional pipelines typically rely on manually defined...
TurnBench is a new multi‑domain benchmark for evaluating turn‑taking dynamics in spoken dialogue. It comprises a 30‑hour hand‑labeled corpus of dyadic human conversations, a standardized evaluation protocol for end‑of‑turn and interruption detection, and covers six distinct interaction styles with triple annotation. The benchmark also provides a 104‑hour training set, a public leaderboard, and an interactive dataset viewer at https://turnbench.sesame.com.
The paper introduces ContraTalk, a benchmark that tests whether dialogue models truly use acoustic cues or rely on transcript shortcuts. It formalizes cross‑modal disagreement, creates conflict and consistent QA examples, and proposes an Audio Twin representation to expose acoustic evidence to models. Experiments show that while text‑only LLMs perform well on consistent cases, they falter on conflict cases, and AudioLLMs only partially mitigate this issue.
The study introduces a World Values Survey–grounded simulation framework to test whether large language model agents can faithfully represent diverse human value systems. In about 4,000 conversations with 1,200 personas across three models, more than half of the agents failed to express their assigned value profiles from the start, and only 2–7% drifted over time. The results show systematic deviations from the intended value distributions and reveal that simulated dialogues differ from human discussions in their balance of stylistic consistency and semantic diversity.
arXiv:2511. 17813v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: LLM-based simulations can enable controlled studies of civic deliberation, but current systems lack speaker-attributed data and methods for evaluating long-form institutional behavior.
arXiv:2606. 09169v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In recent years, unified multimodal models (UMMs) have emerged to support both understanding and generation within a single framework.
arXiv:2606.06443v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models are increasingly used to simulate social media users and infer how individuals may respond to online discussions. However, it...
arXiv:2606. 26106v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in emotionally charged situations involving interpersonal conflict, frustration, and distress.
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:2607. 20734v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As LLMs become more capable, they are increasingly deployed as collaborative agents, taking on user-delegated tasks through iterative interaction.