Planning Like Human: A Dual-process Framework for Dialogue Planning
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
• This paper presents a "dual-process framework" for dialogue planning, which aims to mimic human-like reasoning in conversational agents.
• The framework combines a fast, intuitive "System 1" process with a slower, more deliberative "System 2" process to generate dialogue responses.
• The authors evaluate their approach on several dialogue datasets and find that it outperforms other planning-based dialogue systems.
Plain English Explanation
The paper proposes a new way for conversational AI systems to plan their responses during a dialogue. The key idea is to combine two different "modes" of reasoning that humans use:
-
Intuitive Reasoning (System 1): This is a fast, automatic process that draws on past experiences and heuristics to quickly generate an initial response. This is similar to how humans often respond to conversational prompts in a natural, instinctive way.
-
Deliberative Reasoning (System 2): This is a slower, more analytical process that carefully considers the context and generates a more thoughtful, nuanced response. Humans use this mode when faced with complex or ambiguous situations that require more careful planning.
The authors argue that by incorporating both of these reasoning modes, their "dual-process" dialogue system can produce responses that are more natural and human-like compared to systems that rely solely on one approach. They evaluate their framework on several dialogue datasets and find that it outperforms other planning-based dialogue systems.
Technical Explanation
The core of the authors' approach is a two-stage "dual-process" dialogue planning framework. The first stage uses a "System 1" process that quickly generates an initial response based on heuristics and patterns learned from data. This rapid, intuitive response is then passed to a "System 2" process that performs more deliberative reasoning to refine the response.
The System 1 process uses a neural network-based model trained on a large dialogue corpus to predict likely dialogue actions and responses given the current context. This allows it to generate an initial response efficiently, similar to how humans often respond to conversational prompts in a natural, instinctive way.
The System 2 process then takes this initial response and plans a more nuanced, context-aware dialogue strategy using a hierarchical planning approach. It considers the long-term goals of the dialogue and generates a sequence of actions and responses to best achieve those goals.
The authors evaluate their dual-process framework on several dialogue datasets, including link, link, and link. They find that it outperforms other planning-based dialogue systems, such as link and link, in terms of response quality and human-likeness.
Critical Analysis
The authors present a compelling approach to dialogue planning that aims to mimic human-like reasoning. The dual-process framework is well-grounded in cognitive science research on human decision-making and seems to offer practical benefits in terms of response quality and naturalness.
However, the paper does not address some potential limitations of the approach. For example, it's unclear how the system would handle highly context-dependent or emotionally-charged dialogues, where the interplay between intuitive and deliberative reasoning may be more complex. Additionally, the evaluation is limited to a few dialogue datasets, and the authors acknowledge that further research is needed to fully understand the strengths and weaknesses of the dual-process approach.
Overall, this research represents an interesting step towards more human-like dialogue systems. By incorporating both fast, intuitive and slower, deliberative reasoning, the authors have developed a framework that may be more adaptable and responsive to the nuances of human conversation. As the field of conversational AI continues to evolve, approaches like this could help bridge the gap between machine and human-like communication.
Conclusion
This paper presents a novel "dual-process" framework for dialogue planning that aims to mimic human-like reasoning. By combining fast, intuitive "System 1" processing with slower, more deliberative "System 2" planning, the authors have developed a system that can generate more natural and context-aware dialogue responses.
The evaluation results suggest that this approach outperforms other planning-based dialogue systems, indicating that the combination of intuitive and analytical reasoning may be a promising direction for conversational AI. While the paper does not address all the potential limitations of the approach, it represents an important step towards developing dialogue agents that can engage in more human-like communication.
As the field of conversational AI continues to advance, frameworks like the one presented in this paper could help push the boundaries of what is possible in terms of natural language interaction between humans and machines.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Planning Like Human: A Dual-process Framework for Dialogue Planning
Tao He, Lizi Liao, Yixin Cao, Yuanxing Liu, Ming Liu, Zerui Chen, Bing Qin
In proactive dialogue, the challenge lies not just in generating responses but in steering conversations toward predetermined goals, a task where Large Language Models (LLMs) typically struggle due to their reactive nature. Traditional approaches to enhance dialogue planning in LLMs, ranging from elaborate prompt engineering to the integration of policy networks, either face efficiency issues or deliver suboptimal performance. Inspired by the dualprocess theory in psychology, which identifies two distinct modes of thinking - intuitive (fast) and analytical (slow), we propose the Dual-Process Dialogue Planning (DPDP) framework. DPDP embodies this theory through two complementary planning systems: an instinctive policy model for familiar contexts and a deliberative Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) mechanism for complex, novel scenarios. This dual strategy is further coupled with a novel two-stage training regimen: offline Reinforcement Learning for robust initial policy model formation followed by MCTS-enhanced on-the-fly learning, which ensures a dynamic balance between efficiency and strategic depth. Our empirical evaluations across diverse dialogue tasks affirm DPDP's superiority in achieving both high-quality dialogues and operational efficiency, outpacing existing methods.
Read more6/11/2024
0
MultiTalk: Introspective and Extrospective Dialogue for Human-Environment-LLM Alignment
Venkata Naren Devarakonda, Ali Umut Kaypak, Shuaihang Yuan, Prashanth Krishnamurthy, Yi Fang, Farshad Khorrami
LLMs have shown promising results in task planning due to their strong natural language understanding and reasoning capabilities. However, issues such as hallucinations, ambiguities in human instructions, environmental constraints, and limitations in the executing agent's capabilities often lead to flawed or incomplete plans. This paper proposes MultiTalk, an LLM-based task planning methodology that addresses these issues through a framework of introspective and extrospective dialogue loops. This approach helps ground generated plans in the context of the environment and the agent's capabilities, while also resolving uncertainties and ambiguities in the given task. These loops are enabled by specialized systems designed to extract and predict task-specific states, and flag mismatches or misalignments among the human user, the LLM agent, and the environment. Effective feedback pathways between these systems and the LLM planner foster meaningful dialogue. The efficacy of this methodology is demonstrated through its application to robotic manipulation tasks. Experiments and ablations highlight the robustness and reliability of our method, and comparisons with baselines further illustrate the superiority of MultiTalk in task planning for embodied agents.
Read more9/26/2024
✅
0
Learning Planning-based Reasoning by Trajectories Collection and Process Reward Synthesizing
Fangkai Jiao, Chengwei Qin, Zhengyuan Liu, Nancy F. Chen, Shafiq Joty
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant potential in handling complex reasoning tasks through step-by-step rationale generation. However, recent studies have raised concerns regarding the hallucination and flaws in their reasoning process. Substantial efforts are being made to improve the reliability and faithfulness of the generated rationales. Some approaches model reasoning as planning, while others focus on annotating for process supervision. Nevertheless, the planning-based search process often results in high latency due to the frequent assessment of intermediate reasoning states and the extensive exploration space. Additionally, supervising the reasoning process with human annotation is costly and challenging to scale for LLM training. To address these issues, in this paper, we propose a framework to learn planning-based reasoning through Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) on collected trajectories, which are ranked according to synthesized process rewards. Our results on challenging logical reasoning benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of our learning framework, showing that our 7B model can surpass the strong counterparts like GPT-3.5-Turbo.
Read more4/16/2024
0
Ask-before-Plan: Proactive Language Agents for Real-World Planning
Xuan Zhang, Yang Deng, Zifeng Ren, See-Kiong Ng, Tat-Seng Chua
The evolution of large language models (LLMs) has enhanced the planning capabilities of language agents in diverse real-world scenarios. Despite these advancements, the potential of LLM-powered agents to comprehend ambiguous user instructions for reasoning and decision-making is still under exploration. In this work, we introduce a new task, Proactive Agent Planning, which requires language agents to predict clarification needs based on user-agent conversation and agent-environment interaction, invoke external tools to collect valid information, and generate a plan to fulfill the user's demands. To study this practical problem, we establish a new benchmark dataset, Ask-before-Plan. To tackle the deficiency of LLMs in proactive planning, we propose a novel multi-agent framework, Clarification-Execution-Planning (texttt{CEP}), which consists of three agents specialized in clarification, execution, and planning. We introduce the trajectory tuning scheme for the clarification agent and static execution agent, as well as the memory recollection mechanism for the dynamic execution agent. Extensive evaluations and comprehensive analyses conducted on the Ask-before-Plan dataset validate the effectiveness of our proposed framework.
Read more6/19/2024