When the Database Fails: Prompting LLM Dialogue Agents for Safe Recovery in Task-Oriented Dialogue

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.31307v1
• Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2026 08:18:11 GMT
• Title: When the Database Fails: Prompting LLM Dialogue Agents for Safe Recovery in Task-Oriented Dialogue
• Abstract summary: We study a lightweight prompting-based recovery approach that improves robustness without retraining or additional model calls.<n>We compare three response strategies, including a guided recovery prompt conditioned on structured database status.<n>We find that naive agents hallucinate on 30.5% of failure turns on MultiWOZ and 20.9% on SGD.
• Score: 1.9116784879310027
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models used in task-oriented dialogue often produce fluent but unsafe responses when backend database calls fail, return empty results, or surface mismatched information, inventing venues, confirmations, or booking details not grounded in the database. We study a lightweight prompting-based recovery approach that improves robustness without retraining or additional model calls. We compare three response strategies, including a guided recovery prompt conditioned on structured database status, across six open-weight model families (DeepSeek-R1, Gemma-2, Llama-3, Mistral, Phi-3, and Qwen-2.5) and four database conditions: empty result, wrong-domain retrieval, API error, and clean retrieval. Using fault-injected benchmarks built on two structurally different datasets, MultiWOZ 2.2 (5 domains) and SGD (20 domains), we find that naive agents hallucinate on 30.5% of failure turns on MultiWOZ and 20.9% on SGD. Our Guided-Retry strategy reduces hallucination by 50% on MultiWOZ (30.5 to 15.3%) and by 42% on SGD (20.9 to 12.2%) without retraining. However, residual hallucination remains substantial (6-37% across models), with wrong-domain failures the hardest case. Results are consistent across both datasets and all six model families, and human annotation shows substantial agreement while supporting the validity of the automatic commitment-safety metric.

Related papers

• SPIEval: Evaluating Large Language Models as Mobile Assistants over Scattered Personal Information [61.41881137371855]
  We introduce SPIEval, a benchmark for large language models (LLMs)<n> SPIEval comprises 250 tasks spanning 4,335 personal records distributed across 10 apps and supports multi-turn interaction through 21 tools.<n>The best-performing model, GPT-5.5 (xhigh), achieves only 57.3% accuracy, while the weakest achieves just 16.4%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-11T09:14:53Z)
• SearchAuditor: Auditing and Attributing Failures in Long-Horizon Search Agents [56.400332595452966]
  We introduce SearchAuditBench, a benchmark that evaluates whether auditors can localize, attribute, and repair search-agent failures.<n>SearchAuditBench comprises 1,243 failed trajectories, averaging 73.1 messages and 65.1K tokens, collected from eight open-weight models on five deep-search benchmarks.<n>We propose SearchAuditor, a multi-perspective auditing framework that effectively localizes, attributes, and repairs search-agent failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-05T09:09:00Z)
• DBA-Bench: A Production-Fidelity Benchmark for LLM-Based Database Operations Agents [11.99420231543344]
  LLM-based database agents show promise, but differing task scopes, testbeds, and metrics hinder comparison.<n>We present DBA-Bench, a benchmark addressing these gaps through production fidelity, outcome-first evaluation, and controlled scenario.<n>The benchmark contains 106 scenarios across seven task domains, with two public difficulty labels based on reference-path depth and environmental complexity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-24T10:11:24Z)
• Rewarding the Scientific Process: Process-Level Reward Modeling for Agentic Data Analysis [68.28714988482703]
  Process Reward Models (PRMs) have achieved remarkable success in augmenting the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We present a study revealing that general-domain PRMs struggle to supervise data analysis agents.<n>We introduce DataPRM, a novel environment-aware generative process reward model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-27T09:00:30Z)
• APEX-EM: Non-Parametric Online Learning for Autonomous Agents via Structured Procedural-Episodic Experience Replay [7.370176470430802]
  LLM-based autonomous agents lack persistent procedural memory.<n>We present APEX-EM, a non-parametric online learning framework that accumulates, retrieves, and reuses structured procedural plans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-31T00:24:56Z)
• Can Small Language Models Use What They Retrieve? An Empirical Study of Retrieval Utilization Across Model Scale [0.0]
  We evaluate five model sizes from 360M to 8B across three architecture families SmolLM2 Qwen2.5 and Llama 3.1.<n>We find that for models below 7B parameters the main limitation of RAG is context utilization rather than retrieval quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-12T03:59:42Z)
• TestExplora: Benchmarking LLMs for Proactive Bug Discovery via Repository-Level Test Generation [19.43198506241428]
  We present TestExplora, a benchmark designed to evaluate Large Language Models as proactive testers.<n>TestExplora contains 2,389 tasks from 482 repositories and hides all defect-related signals.<n>Our evaluation reveals a significant capability gap: state-of-the-art models achieve a maximum Fail-to-Pass (F2P) rate of only 16.06%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-11T03:22:51Z)
• Eigen-1: Adaptive Multi-Agent Refinement with Monitor-Based RAG for Scientific Reasoning [53.45095336430027]
  We develop a unified framework that combines implicit retrieval and structured collaboration.<n>On Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) Bio/Chem Gold, our framework achieves 48.3% accuracy.<n>Results on SuperGPQA and TRQA confirm robustness across domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T14:05:55Z)
• Retrieval-Augmented Generation with Conflicting Evidence [57.66282463340297]
  Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly employing retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to improve the factuality of their responses.<n>In practice, these systems often need to handle ambiguous user queries and potentially conflicting information from multiple sources.<n>We propose RAMDocs (Retrieval with Ambiguity and Misinformation in Documents), a new dataset that simulates complex and realistic scenarios for conflicting evidence for a user query.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-17T16:46:11Z)
• Out of Style: RAG's Fragility to Linguistic Variation [29.59506089890902]
  User queries exhibit greater linguistic variations and can trigger cascading errors across interdependent RAG components.<n>We analyze how varying four linguistic dimensions (formality, readability, politeness, and grammatical correctness) impact RAG performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-11T03:30:26Z)
• "Knowing When You Don't Know": A Multilingual Relevance Assessment Dataset for Robust Retrieval-Augmented Generation [90.09260023184932]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) grounds Large Language Model (LLM) output by leveraging external knowledge sources to reduce factual hallucinations. NoMIRACL is a human-annotated dataset for evaluating LLM robustness in RAG across 18 typologically diverse languages. We measure relevance assessment using: (i) hallucination rate, measuring model tendency to hallucinate, when the answer is not present in passages in the non-relevant subset, and (ii) error rate, measuring model inaccuracy to recognize relevant passages in the relevant subset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-18T17:18:04Z)

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.