Can Small Language Models Handle Context-Summarized Multi-Turn Customer-Service QA? A Synthetic Data-Driven Comparative Evaluation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.00665v1
• Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2026 11:27:25 GMT
• Title: Can Small Language Models Handle Context-Summarized Multi-Turn Customer-Service QA? A Synthetic Data-Driven Comparative Evaluation
• Authors: Lakshan Cooray, Deshan Sumanathilaka, Pattigadapa Venkatesh Raju,
• Abstract summary: Small Language Models (SLMs) provide a more efficient alternative to Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>This study investigates instruction-tuned SLMs for context-summarized multi-turn customer-service QA.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Customer-service question answering (QA) systems increasingly rely on conversational language understanding. While Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve strong performance, their high computational cost and deployment constraints limit practical use in resource-constrained environments. Small Language Models (SLMs) provide a more efficient alternative, yet their effectiveness for multi-turn customer-service QA remains underexplored, particularly in scenarios requiring dialogue continuity and contextual understanding. This study investigates instruction-tuned SLMs for context-summarized multi-turn customer-service QA, using a history summarization strategy to preserve essential conversational state. We also introduce a conversation stage-based qualitative analysis to evaluate model behavior across different phases of customer-service interactions. Nine instruction-tuned low-parameterized SLMs are evaluated against three commercial LLMs using lexical and semantic similarity metrics alongside qualitative assessments, including human evaluation and LLM-as-a-judge methods. Results show notable variation across SLMs, with some models demonstrating near-LLM performance, while others struggle to maintain dialogue continuity and contextual alignment. These findings highlight both the potential and current limitations of low-parameterized language models for real-world customer-service QA systems.

Related papers

• Automated Multiple Mini Interview (MMI) Scoring [5.277507079014855]
  We show that state-of-the-art rationale-based fine-tuning methods struggle with the abstract, context-dependent nature of Mini-Interviews.<n>We introduce a multi-agent prompting framework that breaks down the evaluation process into transcript refinement and criterion-specific scoring.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T17:20:25Z)
• Assessing the Business Process Modeling Competences of Large Language Models [40.495149980011924]
  Large language models (LLMs) have significantly expanded the possibilities for generating Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) models directly from natural language.<n>We introduce BEF4LLM, a novel evaluation framework comprising four perspectives: syntactic quality, pragmatic quality, semantic quality, and validity.<n>Using BEF4LLM, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of open-source LLMs and benchmark their performance against human modeling experts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-29T14:34:20Z)
• CARE-Bench: A Benchmark of Diverse Client Simulations Guided by Expert Principles for Evaluating LLMs in Psychological Counseling [44.86705916946909]
  We introduce textbfCARE-Bench, a dynamic and interactive automated benchmark.<n>It is built upon diverse client profiles derived from real-world counseling cases and simulated according to expert guidelines.<n> CARE-Bench provides a multidimensional performance evaluation grounded in established psychological scales.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-12T15:19:44Z)
• KnowMT-Bench: Benchmarking Knowledge-Intensive Long-Form Question Answering in Multi-Turn Dialogues [58.305425399644086]
  Multi-Turn Long-Form Question Answering (MT-LFQA) is a key application paradigm of Large Language Models (LLMs) in knowledge-intensive domains.<n>We introduce textbfKnowMT-Bench, the textitfirst-ever benchmark designed to systematically evaluate MT-LFQA for LLMs across knowledge-intensive fields.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-26T04:32:29Z)
• Federated In-Context Learning: Iterative Refinement for Improved Answer Quality [62.72381208029899]
  In-context learning (ICL) enables language models to generate responses without modifying their parameters by leveraging examples provided in the input.<n>We propose Federated In-Context Learning (Fed-ICL), a general framework that enhances ICL through an iterative, collaborative process.<n>Fed-ICL progressively refines responses by leveraging multi-round interactions between clients and a central server, improving answer quality without the need to transmit model parameters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-09T05:33:28Z)
• MLLM-CL: Continual Learning for Multimodal Large Language Models [39.19456474036905]
  We introduce MLLM-CL, a novel benchmark encompassing domain and ability continual learning.<n>We propose preventing catastrophic interference through parameter isolation and an MLLM-based routing mechanism.<n>Our approach can integrate domain-specific knowledge and functional abilities with minimal forgetting, significantly outperforming existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T17:58:13Z)
• MEDAL: A Framework for Benchmarking LLMs as Multilingual Open-Domain Dialogue Evaluators [10.105344895924164]
  Existing meta-evaluation benchmarks are static, outdated, and lacking in multilingual coverage.<n>We introduce MEDAL, an automated multi-agent framework for curating more representative and diverse evaluation benchmarks.<n>Using MEDAL, we uncover that state-of-the-art judges fail to reliably detect nuanced issues such as lack of empathy, commonsense, or relevance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T18:45:42Z)
• LlaMADRS: Prompting Large Language Models for Interview-Based Depression Assessment [75.44934940580112]
  This study introduces LlaMADRS, a novel framework leveraging open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate depression severity assessment.<n>We employ a zero-shot prompting strategy with carefully designed cues to guide the model in interpreting and scoring transcribed clinical interviews.<n>Our approach, tested on 236 real-world interviews, demonstrates strong correlations with clinician assessments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-07T08:49:04Z)
• AGENT-CQ: Automatic Generation and Evaluation of Clarifying Questions for Conversational Search with LLMs [53.6200736559742]
  AGENT-CQ consists of two stages: a generation stage and an evaluation stage. CrowdLLM simulates human crowdsourcing judgments to assess generated questions and answers. Experiments on the ClariQ dataset demonstrate CrowdLLM's effectiveness in evaluating question and answer quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-25T17:06:27Z)
• Leveraging LLMs for Dialogue Quality Measurement [27.046917937460798]
  Large language models (LLMs) show robust zeroshot and few-shot capabilities across NLP tasks. Manipulating factors such as model size, in-context examples, and selection techniques, we examine "chain-of-thought" (CoT) reasoning and label extraction procedures. Our results indicate that LLMs that are suitably fine-tuned and have sufficient reasoning capabilities can be leveraged for automated dialogue evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T06:19:47Z)
• Learning to Clarify: Multi-turn Conversations with Action-Based Contrastive Self-Training [33.57497419019826]
  Action-Based Contrastive Self-Training enables data-efficient dialogue policy learning in multi-turn conversation modeling.<n>We demonstrate ACT's efficacy under in data-efficient tuning scenarios, even when there is no action label available.<n>We also propose evaluating LLMs' ability to function as conversational agents by examining whether they can implicitly recognize and reason about ambiguity in conversation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-31T22:44:48Z)
• 'What are you referring to?' Evaluating the Ability of Multi-Modal Dialogue Models to Process Clarificational Exchanges [65.03196674816772]
  Referential ambiguities arise in dialogue when a referring expression does not uniquely identify the intended referent for the addressee. Addressees usually detect such ambiguities immediately and work with the speaker to repair it using meta-communicative, Clarification Exchanges (CE): a Clarification Request (CR) and a response. Here, we argue that the ability to generate and respond to CRs imposes specific constraints on the architecture and objective functions of multi-modal, visually grounded dialogue models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-28T13:44:33Z)
• Rethinking the Evaluation for Conversational Recommendation in the Era of Large Language Models [115.7508325840751]
  The recent success of large language models (LLMs) has shown great potential to develop more powerful conversational recommender systems (CRSs) In this paper, we embark on an investigation into the utilization of ChatGPT for conversational recommendation, revealing the inadequacy of the existing evaluation protocol. We propose an interactive Evaluation approach based on LLMs named iEvaLM that harnesses LLM-based user simulators.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T15:12:43Z)

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.