arxiv: 2604.18375 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-20 · 💻 cs.CL · cs.AI

Recognition: unknown

IceBreaker for Conversational Agents: Breaking the First-Message Barrier with Personalized Starters

Feng Zhang, Guanyu Jiang, Haoming Li, Hongwei Zheng, Jingwu Chen, Tianyu Wu, Weiqi Wu, Yongchun Zhu, Zhengjia Wang

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 04:42 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CL cs.AI

keywords conversational agentsconversation starterscold-start initiationpersonalized generationresonance-aware distillationuser engagementA/B testing

0 comments

The pith

IceBreaker generates personalized conversation starters from session summaries to break the first-message barrier in cold-start scenarios.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that conversational agents face a distinct initiation problem where users hold vague needs but lack explicit queries, stalling conversations before they start. IceBreaker addresses this with a two-step process that first distills trigger interests from session summaries to create resonance, then generates starters aligned to personal preferences through a self-reinforced optimization loop. A sympathetic reader would care because successful initiation could convert passive responders into proactive systems that sustain longer user relationships. The work demonstrates this through production A/B tests showing gains in activity and click rates, indicating the method scales beyond lab settings.

Core claim

IceBreaker frames human ice-breaking as a two-step handshake: resonance-aware interest distillation extracts trigger interests from session summaries in the absence of explicit intent, while interaction-oriented starter generation applies personalized preference alignment and a self-reinforced loop to produce engaging first messages that raise user active days by 0.184 percent and click-through rate by 9.425 percent in large-scale online tests.

What carries the argument

The two-step handshake of resonance-aware interest distillation from session summaries followed by interaction-oriented starter generation with personalized preference alignment and self-reinforced loop.

If this is right

Personalized starters derived from history increase the likelihood that vague-need users will send an initial message.
The self-reinforced loop allows the system to iteratively improve starter quality based on observed click and continuation signals.
Production deployment becomes feasible once resonance distillation and alignment steps are integrated into existing agent pipelines.
Gains in active days and click-through rate translate directly to higher overall user retention in conversational products.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same distillation-plus-generation pattern could apply to other cold-start recommendation tasks where only historical context is available.
If resonance signals prove robust across languages and cultures, the method might reduce onboarding friction in global agent platforms.
Combining session summaries with lightweight user profiles could further tighten interest matching without requiring new data collection.

Load-bearing premise

Session summaries contain enough implicit signal to identify genuine trigger interests even when users provide no explicit intent.

What would settle it

A controlled test showing zero or negative change in engagement when IceBreaker starters are replaced by random or generic alternatives in the same production environment.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.18375 by Feng Zhang, Guanyu Jiang, Haoming Li, Hongwei Zheng, Jingwu Chen, Tianyu Wu, Weiqi Wu, Yongchun Zhu, Zhengjia Wang.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Overall architecture of ICEBREAKER. (a) Resonance-Aware Interest Distillation identifies trigger interests from session summaries via personalized resonance scoring and adaptive gating. (b) Interaction-Oriented Starter Generation produces a small set of first-turn starters conditioned on these interests, and optimizes them for personalized interaction utility and within-list diversity through preference al… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Distribution analysis. Left: RID distills away generic topics toward triggering categories. Right: starters generated by ICEBREAKER show broader coverage and higher interaction potential. Avg.S., suggesting sustained engagement after the conversation started. 3.4 Further Analysis Distribution Analysis We map each text to a fine-grained topic category with a pre-trained classifier and visualize topic propo… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Conversational agents, such as ChatGPT and Doubao, have become essential daily assistants for billions of users. To further enhance engagement, these systems are evolving from passive responders to proactive companions. However, existing efforts focus on activation within ongoing dialogues, while overlooking a key real-world bottleneck. In the conversation initiation stage, users may have a vague need but no explicit query intent, creating a first-message barrier where the conversation holds before it begins. To overcome this, we introduce Conversation Starter Generation: generating personalized starters to guide users into conversation. However, unlike in-conversation stages where immediate context guides the response, initiation must operate in a cold-start moment without explicit user intent. To pioneer in this direction, we present IceBreaker that frames human ice-breaking as a two-step handshake: (i) evoke resonance via Resonance-Aware Interest Distillation from session summaries to capture trigger interests, and (ii) stimulate interaction via Interaction-Oriented Starter Generation, optimized with personalized preference alignment and a self-reinforced loop to maximize engagement. Online A/B tests on one of the world's largest conversational agent products show that IceBreaker improves user active days by +0.184% and click-through rate by +9.425%, and has been deployed in production.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

IceBreaker gives a workable two-step pipeline for cold-start starters in chatbots, with real deployment but tiny retention lift and thin evidence on why it worked.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that the authors built IceBreaker as a two-step process: distill trigger interests from session summaries to create resonance, then generate starters with a self-reinforced preference loop aimed at engagement. They tested it on a large production chatbot and report a +9.425% CTR bump plus a +0.184% rise in active days, and it stayed in production. That framing of the first-message barrier as its own cold-start problem is the clearest new angle here, and the production numbers give it more weight than pure offline experiments usually carry. The pipeline itself looks straightforward to implement if you already have session logs and engagement signals. The active-days gain is so small it probably does not move the needle on retention in most settings, and the abstract gives almost no information on baselines, controls, statistical tests, or ablations. Without those, it is difficult to separate the method from other changes in the product or from simple reinforcement of whatever already drives clicks in that specific interface. The self-reinforced loop in particular could be capturing local artifacts rather than transferable starter strategies, and nothing in the description shows cross-product or cross-user-group checks. This is for teams already running large conversational products who need a concrete starter-generation recipe they can try tomorrow. It is not for readers looking for general principles or large effect sizes. I would send it to peer review because the deployment is real and the problem is practical, but the reviewers would need to press hard on the experimental details and generalizability.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces IceBreaker, a framework for Conversation Starter Generation to address the first-message barrier in conversational agents operating in cold-start conditions without explicit user intent. It frames the process as a two-step handshake: (i) Resonance-Aware Interest Distillation from session summaries to evoke resonance by capturing trigger interests, and (ii) Interaction-Oriented Starter Generation with personalized preference alignment and a self-reinforced loop to stimulate interaction and maximize engagement. The central empirical claim is that online A/B tests on one of the world's largest conversational agent products yield improvements of +0.184% in user active days and +9.425% in click-through rate, with the system deployed in production.

Significance. If the reported gains prove robust, the work has practical significance for real-world deployment of proactive conversational agents, as it targets a previously overlooked initiation stage and demonstrates measurable engagement lifts at scale. The self-reinforced loop for preference alignment offers a technical approach to optimizing without explicit supervision, and the production deployment provides a concrete existence proof of applicability.

major comments (2)

The abstract (and any corresponding results section) reports positive A/B test outcomes but provides no details on experimental controls, sample sizes, test duration, statistical significance testing, baseline comparisons, or potential confounds. This leaves the central empirical claims of +0.184% active days and +9.425% CTR weakly supported and difficult to interpret or replicate.
The self-reinforced loop is described as optimizing directly against observed engagement signals within the same product's user base and interface. Without ablations isolating the loop's contribution or transfer experiments to other products/user distributions, it remains unclear whether the gains reflect generalizable cold-start strategies or product-specific artifacts (e.g., particular trigger interests or UI patterns).

minor comments (2)

The abstract refers to 'one of the world's largest conversational agent products' without further context on scale or characteristics; adding high-level descriptors (while respecting proprietary constraints) would aid reader understanding.
Notation for key components such as 'resonance-aware distillation' and 'self-reinforced loop' would benefit from an early intuitive example or diagram to clarify the flow from session summaries to starter generation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed and constructive feedback. We have addressed each major comment point by point below, making revisions to the manuscript where necessary to strengthen the presentation of our work.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: The abstract (and any corresponding results section) reports positive A/B test outcomes but provides no details on experimental controls, sample sizes, test duration, statistical significance testing, baseline comparisons, or potential confounds. This leaves the central empirical claims of +0.184% active days and +9.425% CTR weakly supported and difficult to interpret or replicate.

Authors: We agree that the manuscript would benefit from more comprehensive details on the A/B testing procedure. Accordingly, we will revise the paper to include an expanded Experimental Setup section. This addition will cover the sample sizes for the A/B test, the test duration, the statistical significance testing methods with reported p-values, descriptions of the baseline systems, and analysis of potential confounds such as user segmentation and external factors. These changes will directly address the concern and provide better support for our claims. revision: yes
Referee: The self-reinforced loop is described as optimizing directly against observed engagement signals within the same product's user base and interface. Without ablations isolating the loop's contribution or transfer experiments to other products/user distributions, it remains unclear whether the gains reflect generalizable cold-start strategies or product-specific artifacts (e.g., particular trigger interests or UI patterns).

Authors: We appreciate the referee highlighting the need for evidence on the generalizability of the self-reinforced loop. In response, we will add ablation studies in the revised manuscript that remove the self-reinforced loop and measure the impact on performance metrics, thereby isolating its contribution. For transfer experiments, we acknowledge that such studies were not performed in this work due to the constraints of the production deployment on a single platform. We will include a new Limitations and Future Work section discussing this aspect and suggesting how the approach might be adapted to other systems. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in claimed derivation chain

full rationale

The paper describes an empirical system (Resonance-Aware Interest Distillation from session summaries followed by Interaction-Oriented Starter Generation with a self-reinforced preference-alignment loop) whose performance is measured via independent online A/B tests on production traffic. No mathematical derivation chain is presented that reduces a claimed prediction or first-principles result to its own fitted inputs by construction. The self-reinforced loop optimizes against engagement signals, but the headline metrics (+0.184% active days, +9.425% CTR) are externally observed outcomes of a controlled experiment, not tautological outputs of the same optimization. No self-citation load-bearing steps, uniqueness theorems, or ansatz smuggling appear in the provided description. The method is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review yields no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the method is described at a conceptual level without equations or implementation details.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5544 in / 1100 out tokens · 54676 ms · 2026-05-10T04:42:30.724860+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.24251 , year=

Proactive Guidance of Multi-Turn Conversation in Industrial Search , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.24251 , year=

work page arXiv
[2]

Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 , pages=

Prompting and Evaluating Large Language Models for Proactive Dialogues: Clarification, Target-guided, and Non-collaboration , author=. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 , pages=

2023
[3]

ACM Transactions on Information Systems , volume=

Proactive conversational ai: A comprehensive survey of advancements and opportunities , author=. ACM Transactions on Information Systems , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

2025
[4]

OpenAI blog , volume=

Chatgpt: Optimizing language models for dialogue , author=. OpenAI blog , volume=
[5]

First Conference on Language Modeling , year=

Chinmaya Andukuri and Jan-Philipp Fr. First Conference on Language Modeling , year=
[6]

Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024 , pages=

CantTalkAboutThis: Aligning language models to stay on topic in dialogues , author=. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024 , pages=

2024
[7]

Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback

Training a helpful and harmless assistant with reinforcement learning from human feedback , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.05862 , year=

work page Pith review arXiv
[8]

Communications of the ACM , volume=

ELIZA—a computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine , author=. Communications of the ACM , volume=. 1966 , publisher=

1966
[9]

Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025 , pages=

Beyond Words: Integrating Theory of Mind into Conversational Agents for Human-Like Belief, Desire, and Intention Alignment , author=. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025 , pages=

2025
[10]

From llm to conversational agent: A memory enhanced architecture with fine-tuning of large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.02777,

From llm to conversational agent: A memory enhanced architecture with fine-tuning of large language models , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.02777 , year=

work page arXiv
[11]

Hello Again! LLM -powered Personalized Agent for Long-term Dialogue

Li, Hao and Yang, Chenghao and Zhang, An and Deng, Yang and Wang, Xiang and Chua, Tat-Seng. Hello Again! LLM -powered Personalized Agent for Long-term Dialogue. Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2025. doi:10.18653/...

work page doi:10.18653/v1/2025.naacl-long.272 2025
[12]

and Qian, Cheng and Kim, Jeonghwan and Hakkani-Tur, Dilek and Ji, Heng

Wu, Shujin and Fung, Yi R. and Qian, Cheng and Kim, Jeonghwan and Hakkani-Tur, Dilek and Ji, Heng. Aligning LLM s with Individual Preferences via Interaction. Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics. 2025

2025
[13]

LRSA: LLM-RecSys alignment for time-specific next POI recommendation , journal =

Jinhui Zhu and Xiangfeng Luo and Xin Yao and Xiao Wei , keywords =. LRSA: LLM-RecSys alignment for time-specific next POI recommendation , journal =. 2026 , issn =. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2025.104434 , url =

work page doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2025.104434 2026
[14]

and Hong, Lichan and Han, Ningren and Lu, Haokai

Wang, Jianling and Liu, Yifan and Sun, Yinghao and Ma, Xuejian and Wang, Yueqi and Ma, He and Su, Zhengyang and Chen, Minmin and Gao, Mingyan and Dalal, Onkar and Chi, Ed H. and Hong, Lichan and Han, Ningren and Lu, Haokai. User Feedback Alignment for LLM -powered Exploration in Large-scale Recommendation Systems. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of...

work page doi:10.18653/v1/2025.acl-industry.70 2025
[15]

2025 , isbn =

Luo, Chen and Papadimitriou, Dimitri and Muralidharan, Hariharan and Ramasubbu, Dhineshkumar and Kolekar, Aakash and Xu, Wenju and Xu, Cong and Srinivasan, Anirudh and Jain, Mukesh and He, Qi , title =. 2025 , isbn =. doi:10.1145/3726302.3731955 , booktitle =

work page doi:10.1145/3726302.3731955 2025
[16]

ArXiv , year=

RosePO: Aligning LLM-based Recommenders with Human Values , author=. ArXiv , year=
[17]

MAPS : Motivation-Aware Personalized Search via LLM -Driven Consultation Alignment

Qin, Weicong and Xu, Yi and Yu, Weijie and Shen, Chenglei and He, Ming and Fan, Jianping and Zhang, Xiao and Xu, Jun. MAPS : Motivation-Aware Personalized Search via LLM -Driven Consultation Alignment. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2025. doi:10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.152

work page doi:10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.152 2025
[18]

ArXiv , year=

RLRF4Rec: Reinforcement Learning from Recsys Feedback for Enhanced Recommendation Reranking , author=. ArXiv , year=
[19]

2025 , eprint=

RLHF Fine-Tuning of LLMs for Alignment with Implicit User Feedback in Conversational Recommenders , author=. 2025 , eprint=

2025
[20]

2025 , eprint=

From Clicks to Preference: A Multi-stage Alignment Framework for Generative Query Suggestion in Conversational System , author=. 2025 , eprint=

2025
[21]

2023 , eprint=

Aligning Large Language Models with Human: A Survey , author=. 2023 , eprint=

2023
[22]

Authorea Preprints , year=

A survey on large language models: Applications, challenges, limitations, and practical usage , author=. Authorea Preprints , year=
[23]

ACM Transactions on Information Systems , volume=

Large language models for information retrieval: A survey , author=. ACM Transactions on Information Systems , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

2025
[24]

ACM Computing Surveys , volume=

Tool learning with foundation models , author=. ACM Computing Surveys , volume=. 2024 , publisher=

2024
[25]

Learning and individual differences , volume=

ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education , author=. Learning and individual differences , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

2023
[26]

NPJ Digital Medicine , volume=

Systematic review and meta-analysis of AI-based conversational agents for promoting mental health and well-being , author=. NPJ Digital Medicine , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

2023
[27]

2013 , publisher=

The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition , author=. 2013 , publisher=

2013
[28]

Proceedings of the 2023 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems , pages=

Why Johnny can’t prompt: how non-AI experts try (and fail) to design LLM prompts , author=. Proceedings of the 2023 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems , pages=

2023
[29]

Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , pages=

Principles of mixed-initiative user interfaces , author=. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , pages=
[30]

OneRec: Unifying Retrieve and Rank with Generative Recommender and Iterative Preference Alignment

Onerec: Unifying retrieve and rank with generative recommender and iterative preference alignment , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.18965 , year=

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv
[31]

Onesug: The unified end-to-end generative framework for e-commerce query suggestion,

OneSug: The Unified End-to-End Generative Framework for E-commerce Query Suggestion , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.06913 , year=

work page arXiv