The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2408.01417 · v1 · pith:IR2EFXAT · submitted 2024-08-02 · cs.CL · cs.AI· cs.CV· cs.LG

Talk Less, Interact Better: Evaluating In-context Conversational Adaptation in Multimodal LLMs

Reviewed by Pithpith:IR2EFXATopen to challenge →

classification cs.CL cs.AIcs.CVcs.LG
keywords languageefficienticcamllmstheyadaptationconversationalevaluate
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Humans spontaneously use increasingly efficient language as interactions progress, by adapting and forming ad-hoc conventions. This phenomenon has been studied extensively using reference games, showing properties of human language that go beyond relaying intents. It remains unexplored whether multimodal large language models (MLLMs) similarly increase communication efficiency during interactions, and what mechanisms they may adopt for this purpose. We introduce ICCA, an automated framework to evaluate such conversational adaptation as an in-context behavior in MLLMs. We evaluate several state-of-the-art MLLMs, and observe that while they may understand the increasingly efficient language of their interlocutor, they do not spontaneously make their own language more efficient over time. This latter ability can only be elicited in some models (e.g., GPT-4) with heavy-handed prompting. This shows that this property of linguistic interaction does not arise from current training regimes, even though it is a common hallmark of human language. ICCA is available at https://github.com/lil-lab/ICCA.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. DigitalCoach: Communication and Grounding Gaps in Human and Agentic Computer Use Coaching

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    DigitalCoach dataset and evaluations show state-of-the-art models give more direct instructions than humans but fewer explanations and suffer from poor visual grounding in computer-use coaching.