An LLM Feature-based Framework for Dialogue Constructiveness Assessment
Lexin Zhou, Youmna Farag, Andreas Vlachos
Abstract
Research on dialogue constructiveness assessment focuses on (i) analysing conversational factors that influence individuals to take specific actions, win debates, change their perspectives or broaden their open-mindedness and (ii) predicting constructiveness outcomes following dialogues for such use cases. These objectives can be achieved by training either interpretable feature-based models (which often involve costly human annotations) or neural models such as pre-trained language models (which have empirically shown higher task accuracy but lack interpretability). In this paper we propose an LLM feature-based framework for dialogue constructiveness assessment that combines the strengths of feature-based and neural approaches, while mitigating their downsides. The framework first defines a set of dataset-independent and interpretable linguistic features, which can be extracted by both prompting an LLM and simple heuristics. Such features are then used to train LLM featurebased models. We apply this framework to three datasets of dialogue constructiveness and find that our LLM feature-based models outperform or performs at least as well as standard feature-based models and neural models. We also find that the LLM feature-based model learns more robust prediction rules instead of relying on superficial shortcuts, which often trouble neural models. 1
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext d5ea71b9-56f1-4f1e-aef4-62db1a47d01dCited by top-tier papers2
- Evaluation and Facilitation of Online Discussions in the LLM Era: A SurveyKaterina Korre, Dimitris Tsirmpas, Nikos Gkoumas, Emma Cabalé et al.EMNLP 2025
- Computational Analysis of Conversation Dynamics through Participant ResponsivityMargaret A. Hughes, Brandon Roy, Elinor Poole-Dayan, Deb Roy et al.EMNLP 2025
Builds on4
- Debating with More Persuasive LLMs Leads to More Truthful AnswersAkbir Khan, John Hughes, Dan Valentine, Laura Ruis et al.ICML 2024 · 244 citations
- Effects of Persuasive Dialogues: Testing Bot Identities and Inquiry StrategiesWeiyan Shi, Xuewei Wang, Yoojung Oh, Jingwen Zhang et al.CHI 2020 · 93 citations
- A Comprehensive Analysis of the Effectiveness of Large Language Models as Automatic Dialogue EvaluatorsChen Zhang, Luis Fernando D'Haro, Yiming Chen, Malu Zhang et al.AAAI 2024 · 57 citations
- Towards Argument Mining for Social Good: A SurveyEva Maria Vecchi, Neele Falk, Iman Jundi, Gabriella LapesaACL 2021
Related papers
- A Dual-Perspective NLG Meta-Evaluation Framework with Automatic Benchmark and Better InterpretabilityXinyu Hu, Mingqi Gao, Li Lin, Zhenghan Yu et al.ACL 2025
- Language Model as an Annotator: Exploring DialoGPT for Dialogue SummarizationXiachong Feng, Xiaocheng Feng, Libo Qin, Bing Qin et al.ACL 2021
- Disentangling Language and Culture for Evaluating Multilingual Large Language ModelsJiahao Ying, Wei Tang, Yiran Zhao, Yixin Cao et al.ACL 2025 · 7 citations
- Examining Human-AI Collaboration for Co-Writing Constructive Comments OnlineFarhana Shahid, Maximilian Dittgen, Mor Naaman, Aditya VashisthaCSCW 2025 · 2 citations
- X2-DFD: A framework for explainable and extendable Deepfake DetectionYize Chen, Zhiyuan Yan, Guangliang Cheng, Kangran Zhao et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 43 citations
