arXiv AI
Sep 21

Do Personality-Tuned LLMs Make Better Social Agents?

The paper examines whether fine‑tuning large language models (LLMs) with personality‑labelled data improves their ability to act as socially interactive agents. Two small open‑weight LLMs were fine‑tuned on a corpus of personality‑labelled social media posts and dialogues, and the resulting models were evaluated in various social interaction scenarios by independent LLM judges. The findings show that the fine‑tuned models do not outperform their baseline counterparts in role‑playing personalities, though they offer comparable text quality and increased linguistic diversity for the Qwen models; low inter‑rater agreement limits confidence in the results, suggesting future work should focus on training data quality and domain alignment.

By Tim Krabbe, Xiaodan Shi
arXiv AI
Aug 19

Beyond BFI: The CSI for Enhanced Reliability and Validity in Evaluating LLM Personality Traits

The paper introduces the Core Sentiment Inventory (CSI), a new personality trait evaluation tool for large language models (LLMs) that addresses reliability and validity issues found in existing methods like the Big Five Inventory (BFI). CSI is designed specifically for LLMs, supports both English and Chinese, and provides detailed psychological portraits of model behavior. Experiments show that CSI captures nuanced behavioral patterns, improves reliability, and correlates strongly (above 0.85) with real-world LLM outputs.

By Huanhuan Ma, Haisong Gong, Xiaoyuan Yi, Xing Xie, Philip S. Yu, Dongkuan Xu
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 3

PragAlign: Feedback-Guided Pragmatic Alignment for Controlled Synthetic Dialogue Generation

PragAlign is a feedback‑guided framework that improves synthetic dialogue generation by iteratively generating, evaluating, and revising conversations to meet specified service context, target intent, and target emotion. Using an LLM‑based evaluator that scores intent alignment, emotion alignment, coherence, fluency, and overall quality, PragAlign achieves a 99.50% acceptance rate on 800 dialogue specifications, outperforming one‑shot and repeated generation without feedback. Human evaluation confirms that intent expression and dialogue flow are reliably recognized, while emotion appropriateness remains more variable.

By Smitha Muthya Sudheendra, Jaideep Srivastava