Conversational Task Assistants (CTAs) guide users in performing a multitude of activities, such as making recipes. However, ensuring that interactions remain engaging, interesting, and enjoyable for CTA users is not trivial, especially for time-consuming or challenging tasks. Grounded in psychological theories of human interest, we propose to engage users with contextual and interesting statements or facts during interactions with a multi-modal CTA, to reduce fatigue and task abandonment before a task is complete. To operationalize this idea, we train a high-performing classifier (82% F1-score) to automatically identify relevant and interesting facts for users. We use it to create an annotated dataset of task-specific interesting facts for the domain of cooking. Finally, we design and validate a dialogue policy to incorporate the identified relevant and interesting facts into a conversation, to improve user engagement and task completion. Live testing on a leading multi-modal voice assistant shows that 66% of the presented facts were received positively, leading to a 40% gain in the user satisfaction rating, and a 37% increase in conversation length. These findings emphasize that strategically incorporating interesting facts into the CTA experience can promote real-world user participation for guided task interactions.

Recommender systems are widely used to suggest engaging content, and Large Language Models (LLMs) have given rise to generative recommenders. Such systems can directly generate items, including for open-set tasks like question suggestion. While the world knowledge of LLMs enables good recommendations, improving the generated content through user feedback is challenging as continuously fine-tuning LLMs is prohibitively expensive. We present a training-free approach for optimizing generative recommenders by connecting user feedback loops to LLM-based optimizers. We propose a generative explore-exploit method that can not only exploit generated items with known high engagement, but also actively explore and discover hidden population preferences to improve recommendation quality. We evaluate our approach on question generation in two domains (e-commerce and general knowledge), and model user feedback with Click Through Rate (CTR). Experiments show our LLM-based explore-exploit approach can iteratively improve recommendations and consistently increase CTR. Ablation analysis shows that generative exploration is key to learning user preferences, avoiding the pitfalls of greedy exploit-only approaches. A human evaluation strongly supports our quantitative findings.

Methods to generate text from structured data have advanced significantly in recent years, primarily due to fine-tuning of pre-trained language models on large datasets. However, such models can fail to produce output faithful to the input data, particularly on out-of-domain data. Sufficient annotated data is often not available for specific domains, leading us to seek an unsupervised approach to improve the faithfulness of output text. Since the problem is fundamentally one of consistency between the representations of the structured data and text, we evaluate the effectiveness of cycle training in this work. Cycle training uses two models which are inverses of each other: one that generates text from structured data, and one which generates the structured data from natural language text. We show that cycle training, when initialized with a small amount of supervised data (100 samples in our case), achieves nearly the same performance as fully supervised approaches for the data-to-text generation task on the WebNLG, E2E, WTQ, and WSQL datasets. We perform extensive empirical analysis with automated evaluation metrics and a newly designed human evaluation schema to reveal different cycle training strategies’ effectiveness of reducing various types of generation errors. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/Edillower/CycleNLG.

Factual and logical errors made by Natural Language Generation (NLG) systems limit their applicability in many settings. We study this problem in a conversational search and recommendation setting, and observe that we can often make two simplifying assumptions in this domain: (i) there exists a body of structured knowledge we can use for verifying factuality of generated text; and (ii) the text to be factually assessed typically has a well-defined structure and style. Grounded in these assumptions, we propose a fast, unsupervised and explainable technique, DepChecker, that assesses factuality of input text based on rules derived from structured knowledge patterns and dependency relations with respect to the input text. We show that DepChecker outperforms state-of-the-art, general purpose fact-checking techniques in this special, but important case.

Conversational Task Assistants (CTAs) are conversational agents whose goal is to help humans perform real-world tasks. CTAs can help in exploring available tasks, answering task-specific questions and guiding users through step-by-step instructions. In this work, we present Wizard of Tasks, the first corpus of such conversations in two domains: Cooking and Home Improvement. We crowd-sourced a total of 549 conversations (18,077 utterances) with an asynchronous Wizard-of-Oz setup, relying on recipes from WholeFoods Market for the cooking domain, and WikiHow articles for the home improvement domain. We present a detailed data analysis and show that the collected data can be a valuable and challenging resource for CTAs in two tasks: Intent Classification (IC) and Abstractive Question Answering (AQA). While on IC we acquired a high performing model (>85% F1), on AQA the performance is far from being satisfactory (~27% BertScore-F1), suggesting that more work is needed to solve the task of low-resource AQA.