When Large Language Models are Reliable for Judging Empathic Communication

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.10150v1
• Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 20:10:23 GMT
• Title: When Large Language Models are Reliable for Judging Empathic Communication
• Authors: Aakriti Kumar, Nalin Poungpeth, Diyi Yang, Erina Farrell, Bruce Lambert, Matthew Groh,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) excel at generating empathic responses in text-based conversations.<n>How reliably do they judge the nuances of empathic communication?<n>We compare how experts, crowdworkers, and LLMs annotate empathic communication across four evaluative frameworks.
• Score: 41.01696584595341
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) excel at generating empathic responses in text-based conversations. But, how reliably do they judge the nuances of empathic communication? We investigate this question by comparing how experts, crowdworkers, and LLMs annotate empathic communication across four evaluative frameworks drawn from psychology, natural language processing, and communications applied to 200 real-world conversations where one speaker shares a personal problem and the other offers support. Drawing on 3,150 expert annotations, 2,844 crowd annotations, and 3,150 LLM annotations, we assess inter-rater reliability between these three annotator groups. We find that expert agreement is high but varies across the frameworks' sub-components depending on their clarity, complexity, and subjectivity. We show that expert agreement offers a more informative benchmark for contextualizing LLM performance than standard classification metrics. Across all four frameworks, LLMs consistently approach this expert level benchmark and exceed the reliability of crowdworkers. These results demonstrate how LLMs, when validated on specific tasks with appropriate benchmarks, can support transparency and oversight in emotionally sensitive applications including their use as conversational companions.

Related papers

• MEDAL: A Framework for Benchmarking LLMs as Multilingual Open-Domain Chatbots and Dialogue Evaluators [8.672875654352689]
  This paper introduces MEDAL, an automated multi-agent framework for generating, evaluating, and curating dialogue evaluation benchmarks.<n>We generate user-chatbot multilingual dialogues conditioned on varied seed contexts.<n>A strong LLM is then used for a multidimensional analysis of the performance of the chatbots, uncovering noticeable cross-lingual performance differences.<n>A benchmark is then used to assess the ability of several reasoning and non-reasoning LLMs to act as evaluators of open-domain dialogues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T18:45:42Z)
• Amulet: Putting Complex Multi-Turn Conversations on the Stand with LLM Juries [30.095571420819912]
  Amulet is a framework that leverages pertinent linguistic concepts of dialog-acts and maxims to improve the accuracy of LLM-judges.<n>Amulet can be used either as a judge by applying the framework to a single LLM, or integrated into a jury with different LLM judges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-26T18:46:38Z)
• Multimodal Conversation Structure Understanding [12.29827265137757]
  Large language models' ability to understand fine-grained conversational structure remains underexplored.<n>We present a human annotated dataset of 4,398 annotations for speakers and reply-to relationship, 5,755 addressees, and 3,142 side-participants.<n>We evaluate popular audio-visual LLMs and vision-language models on our dataset, and our experimental results suggest that multimodal conversational structure understanding remains challenging.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T06:41:54Z)
• A Personalized Conversational Benchmark: Towards Simulating Personalized Conversations [112.81207927088117]
  PersonaConvBench is a benchmark for evaluating personalized reasoning and generation in multi-turn conversations with large language models (LLMs)<n>We benchmark several commercial and open-source LLMs under a unified prompting setup and observe that incorporating personalized history yields substantial performance improvements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T09:13:22Z)
• GuideLLM: Exploring LLM-Guided Conversation with Applications in Autobiography Interviewing [73.8469700907927]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) succeed in human-guided conversations such as instruction following and question answering.<n>In this study, we first characterize LLM-guided conversation into three fundamental components: Goal Navigation; (ii) Context Management; (iii) Empathetic Engagement.<n>We compare GuideLLM with 6 state-of-the-art LLMs such as GPT-4o and Llama-3-70b-Instruct, from the perspective of interviewing quality, and autobiography generation quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-10T14:11:32Z)
• PersoBench: Benchmarking Personalized Response Generation in Large Language Models [6.8046587254152735]
  We present a new benchmark, PersoBench, to evaluate the personalization ability of large language models (LLMs) in persona-aware dialogue generation. Our analysis, conducted on three well-known persona-aware datasets, evaluates multiple dimensions of response quality, including fluency, diversity, coherence, and personalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T07:29:41Z)
• Can LLMs Understand the Implication of Emphasized Sentences in Dialogue? [64.72966061510375]
  Emphasis is a crucial component in human communication, which indicates the speaker's intention and implication beyond pure text in dialogue. This paper introduces Emphasized-Talk, a benchmark with emphasis-annotated dialogue samples capturing the implications of emphasis. We evaluate various Large Language Models (LLMs), both open-source and commercial, to measure their performance in understanding emphasis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-16T20:41:44Z)
• MT-Bench-101: A Fine-Grained Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models in Multi-Turn Dialogues [58.33076950775072]
  MT-Bench-101 is designed to evaluate the fine-grained abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) in multi-turn dialogues. We construct a three-tier hierarchical ability taxonomy comprising 4208 turns across 1388 multi-turn dialogues in 13 distinct tasks. We then evaluate 21 popular LLMs based on MT-Bench-101, conducting comprehensive analyses from both ability and task perspectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-22T18:21:59Z)
• Cue-CoT: Chain-of-thought Prompting for Responding to In-depth Dialogue Questions with LLMs [59.74002011562726]
  We propose a novel linguistic cue-based chain-of-thoughts (textitCue-CoT) to provide a more personalized and engaging response. We build a benchmark with in-depth dialogue questions, consisting of 6 datasets in both Chinese and English. Empirical results demonstrate our proposed textitCue-CoT method outperforms standard prompting methods in terms of both textithelpfulness and textitacceptability on all datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-19T16:27:43Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.