arXiv:2608. 09939v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Production teams deploying LLM chat agents face a specific quality assurance gap: existing evaluation tools test individual responses or simulate social interactions, but none systematically verify whether real users can achieve their goals through multi-turn conversation.
By Alexandre Cristov\~ao Maiorano
arXiv:2607. 02975v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Effective agency in social environments depends on when an agent seeks knowledge, when it acts, and whether its actions are justified by acquired information.
By Dan C. Hsu, Luke Lu
arXiv:2606. 05563v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating LLM mediators remains challenging, as mediation unfolds as a real-time trajectory shaped by disputants' shifting emotions, intentions, and context.
By Taewon Yun, Hyeonseong Park, Jeonghwan Choi, Hayoon Park, Yeeun Choi, Hwanjun Song
arXiv:2608. 14613v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Modern LLM-agent frameworks increasingly interoperate through standards such as Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP) for agent-to-tool access and Google's Agent2Agent (A2A) protocol for agent delegation and negotiation.
By Wael Albayaydh, Rui Zhao
arXiv:2606. 08200v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating LLM-powered interactive social agents is challenging because socially relevant behaviors depend not only on isolated outputs, but also on prior interactions, social roles, and downstream actions.
By Hyogon Ryu, Jeonghwan Kim, Yewon Lim, Chaeun Lee, Jeongwook Kim, Donghoon Ham
arXiv:2607. 20773v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shifted human--computer interaction from `traditional'' interface journeys toward more conversational exchanges.
By Zeshu Zhu, Natalie Friedman, Kevin Weatherwax, Emily Eiben
arXiv:2602. 12089v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As AI usage becomes more prevalent in social contexts, understanding agent-user interaction is critical to designing systems that imp rove both individual and group outcomes.
By Kehang Zhu, Nithum Thain, Vivian Tsai, James Wexler, Crystal Qian
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. 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.
By Sunnie S. Y. Kim, Margit Bowler, Leon A Gatys
Conversational agents are increasingly embedded in human collaborative work, yet they remain fundamentally passive and reactive: they respond to explicit user requests rather than proactively recognizing moments when a team would benefit from timely intervention as human collaborators often do. This reactive design substantially limits the use of agents as active participants in multi-user collaboration, where disagreements, ambiguous goals, forgotten constraints, underspecified plans, discussion loops, and imbalanced participation can gradually undermine group progress.
arXiv:2607. 16610v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Long-horizon AI agents are becoming increasingly capable, yet their interaction with users remains surprisingly thin.
By Chen Chen, Zhehuai Chen
arXiv:2606. 06388v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent advances in LLM agents have enabled complex cognitive capabilities, such as multi-step reasoning, planning, and tool use, that increasingly position these agents as human collaborators.
By Jiaju Chen, Yuxuan Lu, Jiayi Su, Chaoran Chen, Songlin Xiao, Zheng Zhang, Yun Wang, Yunyao Li, Jian Zhao, Tongshuang Wu, Toby Jia-Jun Li, Dakuo Wang, Bingsheng Yao