Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Strategic Prompting for Conversational Tasks: A Comparative Analysis of Large Language Models Across Diverse Conversational Tasks

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2411.17204 v2 pith:GFGQGSZW submitted 2024-11-26 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords conversationaltasksevaluationperformancemodelsacrosslanguagelarge
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Given the advancements in conversational artificial intelligence, the evaluation and assessment of Large Language Models (LLMs) play a crucial role in ensuring optimal performance across various conversational tasks. In this paper, we present a comprehensive study that thoroughly evaluates the capabilities and limitations of five prevalent LLMs: Llama, OPT, Falcon, Alpaca, and MPT. The study encompasses various conversational tasks, including reservation, empathetic response generation, mental health and legal counseling, persuasion, and negotiation. To conduct the evaluation, an extensive test setup is employed, utilizing multiple evaluation criteria that span from automatic to human evaluation. This includes using generic and task-specific metrics to gauge the LMs' performance accurately. From our evaluation, no single model emerges as universally optimal for all tasks. Instead, their performance varies significantly depending on the specific requirements of each task. While some models excel in certain tasks, they may demonstrate comparatively poorer performance in others. These findings emphasize the importance of considering task-specific requirements and characteristics when selecting the most suitable LM for conversational applications.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. RePaCA: Leveraging Reasoning Large Language Models for Static Automated Patch Correctness Assessment

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RePaCA, a Qwen2.5-Coder 3B model fine-tuned with GRPO, classifies Java patches as correct or overfitting with 83.1% accuracy and 84.8% F1 on a Defects4J-derived benchmark.

Pith tools