Papers › ESAinsTOD: A Unified End-to-End Schema-Aware Instruction-Tuning Framework for...
ESAinsTOD: A Unified End-to-End Schema-Aware Instruction-Tuning Framework for Task-Oriented Dialog Modeling
Dechuan Teng, Chunlin Lu, Libo Qin, Wanxiang Che
Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).
Existing end-to-end modeling methods for modular task-oriented dialog systems are typically tailored to specific datasets, making it challenging to adapt to new dialog scenarios. In this work, we propose ESAinsTOD, a unified End-to-end Schema-Aware Instruction-tuning framework for general Task-Oriented Dialog modeling. This framework introduces a structured methodology to go beyond simply fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs), enabling flexible adaptation to various dialogue task flows and schemas. Specifically, we leverage full-parameter fine-tuning of LLMs and introduce two alignment mechanisms to make the resulting system both instruction-aware and schema-aware: (i) instruction alignment, which ensures that the system faithfully follows task instructions to complete various task flows from heterogeneous TOD datasets; and (ii) schema alignment, which encourages the system to make predictions adhering to the specified schema. In addition, we employ session-level end-to-end modeling, which allows the system to access the results of previously executed task flows within the dialogue history, to bridge the gap between the instruction-tuning paradigm and the real-world application of TOD systems. Empirical results show that while a fine-tuned LLM serves as a strong baseline, our structured approach provides significant additional benefits. In particular, our findings indicate that: (i) ESAinsTOD outperforms state-of-the-art models by a significant margin on end-to-end task-oriented dialog modeling benchmarks: CamRest676, In-Car and MultiWOZ; (ii) more importantly, it exhibits superior generalization capabilities across various low-resource settings, with the proposed alignment mechanisms significantly enhancing zero-shot performance; and (iii) our instruction-tuning paradigm substantially improves the model's robustness against data noise and cascading errors.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2603.09691")
Code
Syntology Ran 1 of 1 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 1 sample from 1 repository, 1 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
1 sample harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 1 of the 1 sample is pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from AaronTengDeChuan/ESAinsTOD. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
9943807bc726919e · report
Results from the paper
The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2603.09691, was issued in March 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections