A Survey on Recent Advances in LLM-Based Multi-turn Dialogue Systems
This survey provides a comprehensive review of research on multi-turn dialogue systems, with a particular focus on multi-turn dialogue systems based on large language models (LLMs). This paper aims to (a) give a summary of existing LLMs and approaches for adapting LLMs to downstream tasks; (b) elaborate recent advances in multi-turn dialogue systems, covering both LLM-based open-domain dialogue (ODD) and task-oriented dialogue (TOD) systems, along with datasets and evaluation metrics; (c) discuss some future emphasis and recent research problems arising from the development of LLMs and the increasing demands on multi-turn dialogue systems.
Introduction. Multi-turn dialogue systems that can generate natural and meaningful responses to communicate with humans are a Multi-turn dialogue systems can be divided into TOD systems and ODD systems. TOD systems assist users in Conventional dialogue systems primarily rely on rule-based approaches and retrieval-based methods. Rule-based enhanced by the emergence of pre-trained LLMs.
Discussion / Conclusion. 10 CONCLUSION evaluation metrics derived from the outputs of multi-turn dialogue systems, which aid in assessing and understanding
Lines of inquiry this paper opens 24
Research framings built by reading the notes related to this paper — the questions it feeds into.
What determines AI's persuasive power and how can it be detected or mitigated?- Why do persuasive AI techniques also reduce factual accuracy?
- What drives AI persuasiveness, post-training or personalization mechanisms?
- Why do study results on AI persuasion vary so widely?
- Where is AI persuasion most dangerous if repeated contact reduces its effect?
- Where does AI persuasive power actually come from in the output?
- Can pseudo-events create the same normative obligations as real communicative exchanges?
- What happens to solidarity and community signaling when AI smooths out voice differences?
- What would co-constructed identity between human and model dialogue look like?
- How does lexical entrainment depend on selective frame-activation in conversation?
- Why do LLMs fabricate continuity when users shift conversational frames?
- Can the same conversation coherently continue across different model versions?
- Does chat-mode deference prevent LLMs from actually taking meaningful positions?
- What role does user contribution play in constituting the interlocutor?
- How does Stalnaker's common ground model apply to machine conversation?
- Does Habermas's strategic action framework explain LLM dialogue behavior?