Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Conversational User-AI Intervention: A Study on Prompt Rewriting for Improved LLM Response Generation

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 2503.16789 v2 pith:A7GFT5PS submitted 2025-03-21 cs.CL

Conversational User-AI Intervention: A Study on Prompt Rewriting for Improved LLM Response Generation

classification cs.CL
keywords userconversationalllmspromptsconversationsneedsaccuratelybetter
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Human-LLM conversations are increasingly becoming more pervasive in peoples' professional and personal lives, yet many users still struggle to elicit helpful responses from LLM Chatbots. One of the reasons for this issue is users' lack of understanding in crafting effective prompts that accurately convey their information needs. Meanwhile, the existence of real-world conversational datasets on the one hand, and the text understanding faculties of LLMs on the other, present a unique opportunity to study this problem, and its potential solutions at scale. Thus, in this paper we present the first LLM-centric study of real human-AI chatbot conversations, focused on investigating aspects in which user queries fall short of expressing information needs, and the potential of using LLMs to rewrite suboptimal user prompts. Our findings demonstrate that rephrasing ineffective prompts can elicit better responses from a conversational system, while preserving the user's original intent. Notably, the performance of rewrites improves in longer conversations, where contextual inferences about user needs can be made more accurately. Additionally, we observe that LLMs often need to -- and inherently do -- make \emph{plausible} assumptions about a user's intentions and goals when interpreting prompts. Our findings largely hold true across conversational domains, user intents, and LLMs of varying sizes and families, indicating the promise of using prompt rewriting as a solution for better human-AI interactions.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. LLMs Get Lost In Multi-Turn Conversation

    cs.CL 2025-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    LLMs drop 39% in performance during multi-turn conversations due to premature assumptions and inability to recover from early errors.

  2. AInterviewer: A Platform for Designing and Conducting AI-led Qualitative Interviews

    cs.HC 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    AInterviewer is an open-source multi-agent platform for AI-led qualitative interviews that integrates controlled question administration with LLMs and supports local models via a web GUI.

  3. OOPrompt: Reifying Intents into Structured Artifacts for Modular and Iterative Prompting

    cs.HC 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    OOPrompt reifies user intents into structured manipulable artifacts to enable modular and iterative prompting in LLM-based interactive systems.