The paper introduces a three-tier persona vector for user simulation in evaluating LLM agents, comprising 23 dimensions across demographics, behavioral traits, and emotional states, plus a query-complexity overlay. It demonstrates that these nuanced personas generate diverse, scenario-reactive conversations, leading to significant variations in agent goal achievement and compliance across different contexts. The model’s design allows for reproducible, auditable user behavior patterns without relying on learned covariance matrices.
By Rahul Khedar, Eshita, Sneha Teja Sree Reddy Thondapu, Mayank Malhotra, Arup Kumar Das, Jitesh Chandra Mishra, Arun Menon, Avinash Karn, Mouli V
The paper introduces a three-tier persona vector to generate diverse, realistic user inputs for evaluating tool-augmented LLM agents. The vector includes 23 dimensions: categorical demographics, continuous behavioral traits, and continuous emotional states, plus a query-complexity overlay. Experiments on 64,698 conversations show that these persona dimensions produce measurable differences in agent performance and realistic scenario-reactive behavior.
arXiv:2609.00250v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Many people now see AI systems as not just productivity tools but as social companions. Researchers are eager to study the consequences of AI compani...
By Jacy Reese Anthis, Mark D\'iaz, Renee Shelby
PersonaForge is a user‑simulation framework that generates realistic multi‑turn interactions between users and agentic systems, addressing the gap that most training data assumes single‑turn queries. It uses a four‑dimensional persona space, SOUL‑driven behavioral control calibrated to real‑user statistics, and Reverse Deep Construction from authentic seed queries to create a 6.3K‑record training set and a 138‑task benchmark called PersonaForge‑Bench across 20 professional domains. Experiments with Qwen3.5‑27B show that training with PersonaForge improves composite scores by 4.1%, especially in Task Completion (+6.0%) and Response Quality (+6.8%), while also reducing turns and tool calls, indicating more efficient interactions.
By Hanglong Lv, Dawei Zhu, Lei Li, Bowen Ye, Huaqiu Liu, Yifan Song, Bofei Gao, Weimin Xiong, Jinhao Dong, Chenhong He, Lingpeng Kong, Qi Liu, Tong Yang, Fuli Luo
The paper introduces a simulation framework that uses large language model (LLM) agents conditioned on data‑driven personas to predict A/B test outcomes. These personas are built from anonymized user behavioral patterns, engagement signals, and inferred demographics, offering a more realistic population model than synthetic or rule‑based personas. The authors evaluate question design, persona data source, behavioral depth versus diversity, and population subsampling, achieving 0.75–0.90 directional accuracy on 40 real A/B tests.
By Ziyad Benomar, Weronika {\L}ajewska, Leonardo Perelli, Saab Mansour
The paper introduces a hypothesis-driven simulation workflow that screens customer experience (CX) agents before deployment, using synthetic customers and simulated tool outputs to emulate multi-step interactions without accessing production backends. Applied to Nubank’s high-volume Card Delivery and Card Management chat-support agents, the simulation’s binary evaluator scores correlated strongly with production results, and simulation-guided iterations raised transactional net promoter score by 36.69 points in a live A/B test. Additionally, screening over 16,000 simulated conversations helped select a model that increased self‑service rate by 8.82 percentage points without harming net promoter score, demonstrating that simulation enables extensive model exploration safely.
By Edesio Alcoba, Kevin Rossell, Aman Gupta, Shao Tang, Jiwoo Hong, Pabel Carrillo-Mendoza, Wanderson Concei\c{c}\~ao Ferreira, Alvaro Tedeschi, Zayd Simjee, Shreya Rajpal, Bruno Finardi Hime, Christian Sousa, Luis Moneda, Herbert Fei, Daniel Silva, Rohan Ramanath
The paper introduces a deterministic, reproducible e‑commerce environment that pre‑commits customer and trajectory parameters, enabling a simulated consumer to attempt purchasing a target cart with the help of an evaluated model. The environment records every assistant action and state, allowing post‑trial evaluation of specific conversation components and applying penalties based on tool‑call accuracy. Using this setup, the authors benchmark eight open‑weight agents (20B–35B parameters) across 160 trials and 44 metrics, revealing nuanced performance issues such as under‑action, over‑purchase, unsupported product attributes, and poor search that are hidden by overall success rates.
By Nimit Shah, Haitz S\'aez de Oc\'ariz Borde
AgentWorld is a simulation framework that evaluates agentic information retrieval by incorporating diverse user personalities based on the Big Five (OCEAN) traits, stateful tool-use environments, and a pass$^k$ consistency metric with structured fault classification and partial-credit scoring. It includes a risk analyzer that uses Monte‑Carlo rollouts and advanced scoring methods to quantify trajectory brittleness and attack attribution. Experiments with conversational analytics, customer‑support agents, and adversarial stress‑testing demonstrate that personality variation reveals failure modes hidden by uniform testing, such as cross‑domain leakage, contextual drift, and significant quality gaps across personas.
By Gunja Agarwal, Arup Kumar Das, Arun Menon, Jitesh Chandra Mishra, Vignesh Divakaran
The paper introduces Test-Time Adaptation through Human‑Agent Interaction (TAHI), a method that uses iterative human feedback to adapt AI agents to individual users’ criteria. By integrating cross‑session interaction data into agent context and weights, and building an evolving rubric module, the authors demonstrate that agents can improve task success by 4.5–20.9% after only a few interactions. The evolving rubric also serves as a scalable annotation tool, detecting 16.0–22.3% more failures than language models or humans alone, and personalized agents can even generalize improvements up to 8.8% across users.
By Zora Zhiruo Wang, Apurva Gandhi, Rulin Shao, Aspen Chen, Jonas Mueller, Zhiqi Liang, Jett Chen, Michael Ryan, Qianou Ma, Luxi He, Zhoujun Cheng, Andre He, Seungone Kim, Jiayi Geng, Mingqian Zheng, Weiwei Sun, Zheyuan Zhang, Xinran Zhao, Yike Wang, Abe Hou, Liwei Jiang, Pang Wei Koh, Diyi Yang, Graham Neubig, Daniel Fried
GAUGE is a new offline protocol that evaluates whether the common practice of using an LLM-as-a-judge to rank task‑oriented agents actually aligns with a verifiable reward. Across 25 agents from six providers on two benchmarks, GAUGE finds that user satisfaction scores are largely uncorrelated with task success, and that the judge’s ranking loses precision when agents are closely matched in performance. The study highlights a gap between ranking validity and construct validity in current evaluation practices.
By Umesh Bodhwani, Thanh Tran, Kai Wei
arXiv:2507. 09788v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLM) have led to a new class of autonomous agents, renewing and expanding interest in the area.
By Paulo Salem, Robert Sim, Christopher Olsen, Prerit Saxena, Rafael Barcelos, Yi Ding
arXiv:2607. 26348v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as synthetic users, stand-ins for human respondents whose simulated answers feed product, policy, and market decisions.
By Zihan Chen, Di Zhu, Lei Nico Zheng