PolyDebate: A Game-Orchestrated Multimodal System for Debate Skills Practice and Evaluation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.16276v1
• Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 08:49:39 GMT
• Title: PolyDebate: A Game-Orchestrated Multimodal System for Debate Skills Practice and Evaluation
• Abstract summary: PolyDebate is a game-orchestrated multimodal system for English debate practice and evaluation.<n>PolyDebate guides learners through staged one-on-one (1v1) debates with an AI opponent.<n>System captures speech and visual delivery evidence, generates context-aware opponent responses.
• Score: 21.783900005189295
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Debate is a structured form of persuasive communication that trains argument construction, rebuttal, oral delivery, and audience awareness. These skills are valued in education, language learning, and professional communication. Recent AI debate systems and LLM-based judges have advanced argument generation and debate evaluation, but most remain text-centered and rarely support learners through a complete multimodal practice experience. We introduce PolyDebate, a game-orchestrated multimodal system for English debate practice and evaluation. PolyDebate guides learners through staged one-on-one (1v1) debates with an AI opponent, while skill cards, props, and coins make persuasive strategies explicit and turn practice into a game-like interaction. During each session, the system captures learner speech and visual delivery evidence, generates context-aware opponent responses, and produces rubric-informed stage-level and overall feedback. PolyDebate is available as both an immersive Unity 3D game version and a web platform version that share the same workflow and evaluation services. Four studies covering AI opponent quality, evaluation coverage, AI judge feedback, and user perception show that PolyDebate brings debate interaction, gamified scaffolding, multimodal assessment, and structured feedback together in a practical workflow for debate skills practice. The demonstration video is available at https://youtu.be/mHwBG1_8Ebk.

Related papers

• A superpersuasive autonomous policy debating system [7.113205880204546]
  DeepDebater is a novel system capable of participating in and winning a full, two-team competitive policy debate.<n>Our system employs a hierarchical architecture of specialized multi-agent agents.<n>Live, interactive end-to-end presentation pipeline renders debates with AI speech and animation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-22T00:45:01Z)
• Game-Time: Evaluating Temporal Dynamics in Spoken Language Models [93.844257719952]
  We introduce the Game-Time Benchmark framework to assess temporal capabilities.<n>Our evaluation of diverse SLM models reveals a clear performance disparity.<n>The GameTime Benchmark provides a foundation for guiding future research toward more temporally-aware conversational AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-30T15:23:39Z)
• Debating for Better Reasoning: An Unsupervised Multimodal Approach [56.74157117060815]
  We extend the debate paradigm to a multimodal setting, exploring its potential for weaker models to supervise and enhance the performance of stronger models.<n>We focus on visual question answering (VQA), where two "sighted" expert vision-language models debate an answer, while a "blind" (text-only) judge adjudicates based solely on the quality of the arguments.<n>In our framework, the experts defend only answers aligned with their beliefs, thereby obviating the need for explicit role-playing and concentrating the debate on instances of expert disagreement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T17:18:17Z)
• DebateBench: A Challenging Long Context Reasoning Benchmark For Large Language Models [1.8197265299982013]
  We introduce DebateBench, a novel dataset consisting of an extensive collection of transcripts and metadata from some of the world's most prestigious competitive debates.<n>The dataset consists of British Parliamentary debates from prestigious debating tournaments on diverse topics, annotated with detailed speech-level scores and house rankings sourced from official adjudication data.<n>We curate 256 speeches across 32 debates with each debate being over 1 hour long with each input being an average of 32,000 tokens.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-10T09:23:03Z)
• Can LLMs Beat Humans in Debating? A Dynamic Multi-agent Framework for Competitive Debate [22.813887723656023]
  Agent for Debate (Agent4Debate) is a dynamic multi-agent framework based on Large Language Models (LLMs) The evaluation employs the Debatrix automatic scoring system and professional human reviewers based on the established Debatrix-Elo and Human-Elo ranking. Experimental results indicate that the state-of-the-art Agent4Debate exhibits capabilities comparable to those of humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T14:02:45Z)
• ExpertAF: Expert Actionable Feedback from Video [81.46431188306397]
  We introduce a novel method to generate actionable feedback from video of a person doing a physical activity, such as basketball or soccer.<n>Our method takes a video demonstration and its accompanying 3D body pose and generates expert commentary describing what the person is doing well and what they could improve.<n>We show how to leverage Ego-Exo4D's [29] videos of skilled activity and expert commentary together with a strong language model to create a weakly-supervised training dataset for this task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-01T16:13:07Z)
• Debatrix: Multi-dimensional Debate Judge with Iterative Chronological Analysis Based on LLM [51.43102092480804]
  Debatrix is an automated debate judge based on Large Language Models (LLMs) To align with real-world debate scenarios, we introduced the PanelBench benchmark, comparing our system's performance to actual debate outcomes. The findings indicate a notable enhancement over directly using LLMs for debate evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-12T18:19:47Z)
• 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)
• DebateKG: Automatic Policy Debate Case Creation with Semantic Knowledge Graphs [0.0]
  We show that effective debate cases can be constructed using constrained shortest path traversals on Argumentative Semantic Knowledge Graphs. We significantly improve upon DebateSum by introducing 53180 new examples. We create a unique method for evaluating which knowledge graphs are better in the context of producing policy debate cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-09T04:19:19Z)
• Persua: A Visual Interactive System to Enhance the Persuasiveness of Arguments in Online Discussion [52.49981085431061]
  Enhancing people's ability to write persuasive arguments could contribute to the effectiveness and civility in online communication. We derived four design goals for a tool that helps users improve the persuasiveness of arguments in online discussions. Persua is an interactive visual system that provides example-based guidance on persuasive strategies to enhance the persuasiveness of arguments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-16T08:07:53Z)

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.