The Thin Line Between Comprehension and Persuasion in LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.01936v2
• Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2025 14:54:09 GMT
• Title: The Thin Line Between Comprehension and Persuasion in LLMs
• Authors: Adrian de Wynter, Tangming Yuan,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) are excellent at maintaining high-level, convincing dialogues.<n>We measure how this capability relates to their understanding of what is being talked about.<n>We find that LLMs are capable of maintaining coherent, persuasive debates, often swaying the beliefs of participants and audiences alike.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are excellent at maintaining high-level, convincing dialogues. They are being fast deployed as chatbots and evaluators in sensitive areas, such as peer review and mental health applications. This, along with the disparate accounts on their reasoning capabilities, calls for a closer examination of LLMs and their comprehension of dialogue. In this work we begin by evaluating LLMs' ability to maintain a debate--one of the purest yet most complex forms of human communication. Then we measure how this capability relates to their understanding of what is being talked about, namely, their comprehension of dialogical structures and the pragmatic context. We find that LLMs are capable of maintaining coherent, persuasive debates, often swaying the beliefs of participants and audiences alike. We also note that awareness or suspicion of AI involvement encourage people to be more critical of the arguments made. When polling LLMs on their comprehension of deeper structures of dialogue, however, they cannot demonstrate said understanding. Our findings tie the shortcomings of LLMs-as-evaluators to their (in)ability to understand the context. More broadly, for the field of argumentation theory we posit that, if an agent can convincingly maintain a dialogue, it is not necessary for it to know what it is talking about. Hence, the modelling of pragmatic context and coherence are secondary to effectiveness.

Related papers

• Interactive Dialogue Agents via Reinforcement Learning on Hindsight Regenerations [58.65755268815283]
  Many real dialogues are interactive, meaning an agent's utterances will influence their conversational partner, elicit information, or change their opinion. We use this fact to rewrite and augment existing suboptimal data, and train via offline reinforcement learning (RL) an agent that outperforms both prompting and learning from unaltered human demonstrations. Our results in a user study with real humans show that our approach greatly outperforms existing state-of-the-art dialogue agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-07T21:37:51Z)
• 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)
• Sibyl: Empowering Empathetic Dialogue Generation in Large Language Models via Sensible and Visionary Commonsense Inference [40.96005200292604]
  We present an innovative framework named Sensible and Visionary Commonsense Knowledge (Sibyl)<n>It is designed to concentrate on the immediately succeeding dialogue, aiming to elicit more empathetic responses.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that incorporating our paradigm for acquiring commonsense knowledge into LLMs comprehensively enhances the quality of their responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-26T14:35:23Z)
• Think Before You Speak: Cultivating Communication Skills of Large Language Models via Inner Monologue [73.69510478736483]
  Large language models (LLMs) can generate fluent, coherent, and diverse responses. However, they lack a crucial ability: communication skills. This article aims to empower LLMs with communication skills through inner monologues. Experimental results show that the proposed CSIM strategy improves the backbone models and outperforms the baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-13T16:19:42Z)
• Exploring the Factual Consistency in Dialogue Comprehension of Large Language Models [51.75805497456226]
  This work focuses on the factual consistency issue with the help of the dialogue summarization task. Our evaluation shows that, on average, 26.8% of the summaries generated by LLMs contain factual inconsistency. To stimulate and enhance the dialogue comprehension ability of LLMs, we propose a fine-tuning paradigm with auto-constructed multi-task data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-13T09:32:12Z)
• Large Language Models: The Need for Nuance in Current Debates and a Pragmatic Perspective on Understanding [1.3654846342364308]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are unparalleled in their ability to generate grammatically correct, fluent text. This position paper critically assesses three points recurring in critiques of LLM capacities. We outline a pragmatic perspective on the issue of real' understanding and intentionality in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T15:51:04Z)
• BotChat: Evaluating LLMs' Capabilities of Having Multi-Turn Dialogues [72.65163468440434]
  This report provides a preliminary evaluation of existing large language models for human-style multi-turn chatting. We prompt large language models (LLMs) to generate a full multi-turn dialogue based on the ChatSEED, utterance by utterance. We find GPT-4 can generate human-style multi-turn dialogues with impressive quality, significantly outperforms its counterparts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T16:53:51Z)
• Prompting and Evaluating Large Language Models for Proactive Dialogues: Clarification, Target-guided, and Non-collaboration [72.04629217161656]
  This work focuses on three aspects of proactive dialogue systems: clarification, target-guided, and non-collaborative dialogues. To trigger the proactivity of LLMs, we propose the Proactive Chain-of-Thought prompting scheme.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T02:49:35Z)

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.