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: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:2601.12208v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Evaluating conversational systems in multi-turn settings remains a fundamental challenge. Conventional pipelines typically rely on manually defined...
By Yunzhe Li, Richie Yueqi Feng, Tianxin Wei, Chin-Chia Hsu
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in interactive systems where understanding user intent precisely is paramount. A key capability for such systems is effective question clarificat...
arXiv:2605. 12213v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: LLM-based conversational AI agents struggle to maintain coherent behavior over long horizons due to limited context.
By Jiazhou Liang, Armin Toroghi, Yifan Simon Liu, Faeze Moradi Kalarde, Liam Gallagher, Scott Sanner
arXiv:2608. 01366v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are integral to complex intellectual tasks, yet output quality remains constrained by user-provided prompts.
By B. Sankar, Pawni Yadav, Srinidhi Ranjini Girish, Amogh A. S
arXiv:2606. 21097v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Deploying highly capable personalized conversational agents in resource-constrained or privacy-sensitive environments remains a significant challenge.
By Junfeng Liu, Christopher T. Symons, Ranga Raju Vatsavai
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
arXiv:2607. 22635v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Target-oriented dialogue systems have demonstrated strong capabilities in completing user goals through interactive conversations.
By Xuzhao Geng, Haozhao Wang, Xuelian Li, Zhenyu Yang, Haonan Lu, Rui Zhang, Ruixuan Li
arXiv:2604. 03924v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Goal-oriented conversational systems require making sequential decisions under uncertainty about the user's intent, where the algorithm must balance information acquisition and target commitment over multiple turns.
By Xinyi Ling, Ye Liu, Reza Averly, Xia Ning
SIT‑Eval is a framework that evaluates conversational agents by sampling diverse situations at each turn and judging responses against situational rules. It uses an LLM‑interlocutor to generate uniformly sampled contexts and a context‑aware LLM‑judge to assess rule compliance. Benchmarking eight large language models on 1,292 turns uncovered hidden failure modes, showing that models with similar overall scores can differ greatly in rule adherence, especially in ambiguity clarification and Socratic questioning.
By Ravil Mussabayev, Saveliy Zavertyaev, Dmitriy Parpulov, Andrey Savchenko
The article surveys evaluation methods for large language model (LLM)-based agents in multi-turn conversations, reviewing nearly 250 scholarly sources through a PRISMA-inspired framework. It introduces two taxonomies: one outlining what to evaluate—task completion, response quality, user experience, memory and context retention, planning, and tool integration—and another detailing how to evaluate, covering annotation-based, automated, hybrid, and self-judging approaches. The framework incorporates both traditional metrics like BLEU and ROUGE and advanced techniques suited to dynamic, interactive dialogues.
By Shengyue Guan, Jindong Wang, Jiang Bian, Bin Zhu, Jian-guang Lou, Haoyi Xiong