Papers › Unlocking the Potential of User Feedback: Leveraging Large Language Model as User...
Unlocking the Potential of User Feedback: Leveraging Large Language Model as User Simulator to Enhance Dialogue System
Zhiyuan Hu, Yue Feng, Anh Tuan Luu, Bryan Hooi, Aldo Lipani
Dialogue systems and large language models (LLMs) have gained considerable attention. However, the direct utilization of LLMs as task-oriented dialogue (TOD) models has been found to underperform compared to smaller task-specific models. Nonetheless, it is crucial to acknowledge the significant potential of LLMs and explore improved approaches for leveraging their impressive abilities. Motivated by the goal of leveraging LLMs, we propose an alternative approach called User-Guided Response Optimization (UGRO) to combine it with a smaller TOD model. This approach uses LLM as annotation-free user simulator to assess dialogue responses, combining them with smaller fine-tuned end-to-end TOD models. By utilizing the satisfaction feedback generated by LLMs, UGRO further optimizes the supervised fine-tuned TOD model. Specifically, the TOD model takes the dialogue history as input and, with the assistance of the user simulator's feedback, generates high-satisfaction responses that meet the user's requirements. Through empirical experiments on two TOD benchmarks, we validate the effectiveness of our method. The results demonstrate that our approach outperforms previous state-of-the-art (SOTA) results.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. 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
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
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