arXiv:2608.18085cs.CL2026-08

让对话模型根据用户性格调整回应,提升互动体验但需权衡真实性。

Persona-Guided LLM Agents for Task-Oriented Dialogue

论文配图:Persona-Guided LLM Agents for Task-Oriented Dialogue
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 用双模型模拟用户与系统对话,测试性格适应对任务完成的影响。
  • 基于对话线索的自适应比直接获知性格更平衡个性化与任务准确率。
  • 性格匹配能提升用户满意度,但可能降低回答的真实性。

以往研究显示大语言模型可在开放式生成中表现多样人格特质,但在目标导向对话中能否保持任务完成能力并适配用户性格仍不明确。本文在任务导向对话(TOD)场景下,构建无需训练的框架,通过两个大模型分别扮演具有特定性格的用户和需完成任务的系统。系统在三种条件下接收用户性格信息:无信息(Neutral)、从对话线索推断(Try)、或被明确告知(Oracle)。在SGD数据集的酒店与餐厅对话任务中,评估GPT-4o、Qwen3-Next-80B和Gemini 2.0 Flash在五大性格维度及其对立面的表现。结果表明,用户代理可稳定表达性格,系统仍能保持较强任务性能,但部分特质表达可靠性较低。适应用户性格可提升约束满足率、信息提供率和用户满意度,但会降低真实性,呈现个性化与任务一致性之间的权衡。当目标性格表现强烈时,显式告知(Oracle)效果更优;而基于线索的推理(Try)在各种强度下均表现稳定,是无需微调实现个性化的更可靠路径。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Prior work has shown that large language models (LLMs) can express diverse personality traits in open-ended text generation. However, it remains unclear whether they can do so in a goal-directed dialogue without compromising task completion, and whether adapting to the user's personality improves the interaction quality. We study these questions in task-oriented dialogue (TOD), where a system helps a user accomplish a goal via multi-turn interaction. We build a training-free framework that simulates a TOD interaction between two LLMs: a user agent that exhibits a target personality and a system agent that adapts to the user while completing the task. To isolate the effect of adaptation, we vary how much the system knows about the user's personality across three conditions. In Neutral, the system receives no personality information. In Try, it infers the personality from dialogue cues. In Oracle, it is given the personality explicitly. We evaluate GPT-4o, Qwen3-Next-80B, and Gemini 2.0 Flash on Hotel and Restaurant dialogues from the Schema-Guided Dialogue (SGD) dataset, across the Big Five traits and their opposite poles. We find that the user agent can express personality while the system maintains strong task performance, although some traits are realized far less reliably than others. Adapting to the user's personality improves constraint satisfaction, inform rate, and user satisfaction, but lowers truthfulness, revealing a trade-off between personalization and task-grounding. Oracle's gains grow when the target trait is strongly expressed, whereas Try's gains are largely insensitive to realization strength. Overall, cue-based adaptation in Try best resolves this trade-off and offers a more reliable route to personality-aware TOD without fine-tuning.

对话系统性格建模LLM应用任务对话

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。