Semantic Variability of Replies Across LLMs: Implications for Designing Conversation-Based Assessment

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.24920v1
• Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 19:22:09 GMT
• Title: Semantic Variability of Replies Across LLMs: Implications for Designing Conversation-Based Assessment
• Abstract summary: This study examines whether LLM-generated replies remain semantically consistent when the underlying LLM changes.<n>Results show that model choice and conversational context both affect response similarity and alignment with human replies.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
• Abstract: This study examines whether LLM-generated replies remain semantically consistent when the underlying LLM changes. Using messages from real collaborative conversations, we compared the semantic similarity of generated replies across LLMs under two conditions: with and without preceding chat history. Results show that model choice and conversational context both affect response similarity and alignment with human replies. These findings indicate that prompting and conversational context alone may not be sufficient to preserve response consistency across LLMs, highlighting the need for infrastructure and design strategies that can maintain stable and comparable responses amid the rapid and continuous evolution of LLMs.

Related papers

• Revising Context, Shifting Simulated Stance: Auditing LLM-Based Stance Simulation in Online Discussions [62.99524765341952]
  Large language models are increasingly used to simulate social media users.<n>We study counterfactual context revision as a framework for auditing LLM-based stance simulation.<n>Results reveal effective and robust stance transitions in both text-only and multimodal strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T17:41:54Z)
• Factors That Support Grounded Responses in LLM Conversations: A Rapid Review [0.0]
  Large language models (LLMs) may generate outputs that are misaligned with user intent, lack contextual grounding, or exhibit hallucinations during conversation.<n>This review aimed to identify and analyze techniques that align LLM responses with conversational goals, ensure grounding, and reduce hallucination and topic drift.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-24T21:18:46Z)
• Evaluating Consistencies in LLM responses through a Semantic Clustering of Question Answering [1.9214041945441436]
  We present a new approach for evaluating semanticencies of Large Language Model (LLM) Our approach evaluates whether LLM re-sponses are semantically congruent for a given question, recognizing that as syntactically different sentences may convey the same meaning. Using the TruthfulQA dataset to assess LLM responses, the study induces N re-sponses per question and clusters semantically equivalent sentences to measure semantic consistency across 37 categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-20T16:21:25Z)
• Beyond the Turn-Based Game: Enabling Real-Time Conversations with Duplex Models [66.24055500785657]
  Traditional turn-based chat systems prevent users from verbally interacting with system while it is generating responses. To overcome these limitations, we adapt existing LLMs to listen users while generating output and provide users with instant feedback. We build a dataset consisting of alternating time slices of queries and responses as well as covering typical feedback types in instantaneous interactions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-22T03:20:10Z)
• Reasoning in Conversation: Solving Subjective Tasks through Dialogue Simulation for Large Language Models [56.93074140619464]
  We propose RiC (Reasoning in Conversation), a method that focuses on solving subjective tasks through dialogue simulation. The motivation of RiC is to mine useful contextual information by simulating dialogues instead of supplying chain-of-thought style rationales. We evaluate both API-based and open-source LLMs including GPT-4, ChatGPT, and OpenChat across twelve tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-27T05:37:10Z)
• Rephrase and Respond: Let Large Language Models Ask Better Questions for Themselves [57.974103113675795]
  We present a method named Rephrase and Respond' (RaR) which allows Large Language Models to rephrase and expand questions posed by humans. RaR serves as a simple yet effective prompting method for improving performance. We show that RaR is complementary to the popular Chain-of-Thought (CoT) methods, both theoretically and empirically.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-07T18:43:34Z)
• An Investigation of LLMs' Inefficacy in Understanding Converse Relations [30.94718664430869]
  We introduce a new benchmark ConvRe focusing on converse relations, which contains 17 relations and 1240 triples extracted from knowledge graph completion datasets. Our ConvRE features two tasks, Re2Text and Text2Re, which are formulated as multi-choice question answering to evaluate LLMs' ability to determine the matching between relations and associated text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-08T13:45:05Z)
• 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)
• Check Your Facts and Try Again: Improving Large Language Models with External Knowledge and Automated Feedback [127.75419038610455]
  Large language models (LLMs) are able to generate human-like, fluent responses for many downstream tasks. This paper proposes a LLM-Augmenter system, which augments a black-box LLM with a set of plug-and-play modules.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-24T18:48:43Z)

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.