The paper evaluates the use of large language models (LLMs) as judges for assessing conversational voice agents, comparing human judgments with GPT‑4.1 and GPT‑5 across telecom and retail interactions. It examines agreement, metric‑level correlations, and consistency across three evaluation configurations (p0, p1, p2) to determine how reliably LLMs can judge conversational quality and safety. The study finds that LLM‑based evaluation can be effective but its reliability varies by metric and configuration, suggesting a hybrid approach where LLMs handle scalable assessment while humans focus on metrics requiring contextual interpretation.
By Anupam Purwar, Shashank Singh, Kritika Srivastava
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%.
By Ilija Subasic, Andrew Rabinovich, Zhao Chen
arXiv:2608. 06329v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Task-oriented conversational agents are evaluated using curated or automatically generated benchmarks, yet benchmark quality is rarely assessed.
By Noam Koren, Roy Bar-Haim, Abigail Goldsteen
The paper introduces a three‑layer checklist-and-judge framework to evaluate interpreter agents that mediate live conversation across languages. It assesses semantic, pragmatic, and cultural‑social dimensions—naturalness, intent, and social appropriateness—rather than just fidelity, in both single‑turn and multi‑turn settings. Extensive validation shows that conventional MT metrics miss failures in stronger interpreters, and that context, structured instructions, and cultural cues influence communicative success.
By Faiz Ghifari Haznitrama, Alice Oh
The paper introduces a multi‑agent platform built on CrewAI for conversational business intelligence. Five specialized agents process natural language queries, retrieve and analyze data, generate visualizations via the Model Context Protocol, and deliver actionable insights. The system includes a defense‑in‑depth security architecture, a query parameterization mechanism, and achieves 95.3% functional accuracy with a 24‑second mean latency, outperforming a single‑agent baseline by 22.6 percentage points in accuracy and 20.2% in quality.
By Manoj N M, Vijayakrishna S, Manjunath Srinivas, Rohit Pahan
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