The paper introduces SalesLLM, a bilingual (Chinese/English) benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) in realistic sales dialogues. It comprises 30,074 scripted configurations and 1,805 curated multi‑turn scenarios from Financial Services and Consumer Goods, with controllable difficulty and personas. An automatic evaluation pipeline uses an LLM judge for sales‑process progress and fine‑tuned BERT classifiers for end‑of‑dialogue buying intent, while a user model, CustomerLM, is trained to improve simulation fidelity. SalesLLM scores correlate strongly with human ratings (Pearson r = 0.86) and reveal that top Chinese LLMs match junior‑to‑intermediate human salespeople but not experts, with cross‑lingual consistency remaining poor.
arXiv:2607. 20471v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Personalization, the act of varying a message to induce action from a specific receiver while keeping sender, channel, and time fixed, has a long tradition in psychology and marketing as a two-party problem in which sender and receiver have independent objectives.
arXiv:2607. 27816v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Role-playing agents (RPAs) have become one of the most important consumer applications of large language models.
arXiv:2608. 13833v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Conversational advertising aims to deliver useful ads within multi-turn assistant interactions.
arXiv:2606. 02754v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Personalization is a crucial capability of modern language agents.
arXiv:2606. 07810v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are widely used as judges for evaluating model outputs, but their high cost, latency, and opacity limit scalability.
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%.
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.
The paper introduces LongJudgeBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate large language models (LLMs) acting as judges for long-form text generation. It highlights that long-form evaluation requires complex, document-level assessments beyond simple length, such as organization, coverage, depth, consistency, and scenario-specific quality. Experiments show a significant reliability gap among current LLM judges, indicating instability across scenarios and limited effectiveness of rubrics or references.
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.
PADM'E is a method for synthesizing preference‑aligned data to meta‑evaluate language‑model (LM) evaluators of agentic behaviors. It reframes meta‑evaluation as a preference judgment problem, generating criterion‑based data with small LMs and no human involvement. In a prototype, PADM'E produced 1,000 samples across four domains and three criteria, and human validation showed agreement with human judgment rising from 73% to 85% compared to a naive baseline.
Merchant risk control at large payment platforms screens tens of millions of merchants daily, where false positives harm legitimate merchants and false negatives leave harmful activity undetected. The hardest cases require jointly understanding a merchant's textual profile and long behavioral sequence.
MTVA-Bench is a new benchmark designed to evaluate the language model component of cascaded voice agents under realistic conditions. It simulates callers with an LLM, mocks backend tool responses, and scores both tool‑call correctness and conversational quality using two LLM judges, covering 49 agents, 490 scenarios, and 7 languages. The benchmark reveals that while models perform similarly on tool selection, they differ widely in argument handling, rule compliance, and dialogue quality, highlighting the nuanced challenges of real‑world voice interactions.