A successful negotiation requires a range of capabilities, including comprehension of the conversation context, Theory-of-Mind (ToM) skills to infer the partner’s motives, strategic reasoning, and effective communication, making it challenging for automated systems. Despite the remarkable performance of LLMs in various NLP tasks, there is no systematic evaluation of their capabilities in negotiation. Such an evaluation is critical for advancing AI negotiation agents and negotiation research, ranging from designing dialogue systems to providing pedagogical feedback and scaling up data collection practices. This work aims to systematically analyze the multifaceted capabilities of LLMs across diverse dialogue scenarios throughout the stages of a typical negotiation interaction. Our analysis highlights GPT-4’s superior performance in many tasks while identifying specific challenges, such as making subjective assessments and generating contextually appropriate, strategically advantageous responses.

Knowledge-grounded dialogue generation is a challenging task because it requires satisfying two fundamental, yet often competing constraints: being responsive in a manner that is specific to what the conversation partner has said while also being attributable to an underlying source document. In this work, we bring this trade-off between these two objectives (specificity and attribution) to light, and ask the question: Can explicit content planning before the response generation help the model to address this challenge? To answer this question, we design a framework called PLEDGE, which allows us to experiment with various plan variables explored in prior work supporting both metric-agnostic and metric-aware approaches. While content planning shows promise, our results on whether it can actually help to navigate this trade-off are mixed – planning mechanisms that are metric-aware (use automatic metrics during training) are better at automatic evaluations but underperform in human judgment compared to metric-agnostic mechanisms. We discuss how this may be caused by over-fitting to automatic metrics, and the need for future work to better calibrate these metrics towards human judgment. We hope the observations from our analysis will inform future work that aims to apply content planning in this context.

A natural way to design a negotiation dialogue system is via self-play RL: train an agent that learns to maximize its performance by interacting with a simulated user that has been designed to imitate human-human dialogue data. Although this procedure has been adopted in prior work, we find that it results in a fundamentally flawed system that fails to learn the value of compromise in a negotiation, which can often lead to no agreements (i.e., the partner walking away without a deal), ultimately hurting the model’s overall performance. We investigate this observation in the context of DealOrNoDeal task, a multi-issue negotiation over books, hats, and balls. Grounded in negotiation theory from Economics, we modify the training procedure in two novel ways to design agents with diverse personalities and analyze their performance with human partners. We find that although both techniques show promise, a selfish agent, which maximizes its own performance while also avoiding walkaways, performs superior to other variants by implicitly learning to generate value for both itself and the negotiation partner. We discuss the implications of our findings for what it means to be a successful negotiation dialogue system and how these systems should be designed in the future.

Dialogue systems capable of social influence such as persuasion, negotiation, and therapy, are essential for extending the use of technology to numerous realistic scenarios. However, existing research primarily focuses on either task-oriented or open-domain scenarios, a categorization that has been inadequate for capturing influence skills systematically. There exists no formal definition or category for dialogue systems with these skills and data-driven efforts in this direction are highly limited. In this work, we formally define and introduce the category of social influence dialogue systems that influence users’ cognitive and emotional responses, leading to changes in thoughts, opinions, and behaviors through natural conversations. We present a survey of various tasks, datasets, and methods, compiling the progress across seven diverse domains. We discuss the commonalities and differences between the examined systems, identify limitations, and recommend future directions. This study serves as a comprehensive reference for social influence dialogue systems to inspire more dedicated research and discussion in this emerging area.

Opponent modeling is the task of inferring another party’s mental state within the context of social interactions. In a multi-issue negotiation, it involves inferring the relative importance that the opponent assigns to each issue under discussion, which is crucial for finding high-value deals. A practical model for this task needs to infer these priorities of the opponent on the fly based on partial dialogues as input, without needing additional annotations for training. In this work, we propose a ranker for identifying these priorities from negotiation dialogues. The model takes in a partial dialogue as input and predicts the priority order of the opponent. We further devise ways to adapt related data sources for this task to provide more explicit supervision for incorporating the opponent’s preferences and offers, as a proxy to relying on granular utterance-level annotations. We show the utility of our proposed approach through extensive experiments based on two dialogue datasets. We find that the proposed data adaptations lead to strong performance in zero-shot and few-shot scenarios. Moreover, they allow the model to perform better than baselines while accessing fewer utterances from the opponent. We release our code to support future work in this direction.

Automated systems that negotiate with humans have broad applications in pedagogy and conversational AI. To advance the development of practical negotiation systems, we present CaSiNo: a novel corpus of over a thousand negotiation dialogues in English. Participants take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for food, water, and firewood packages for their upcoming trip. Our design results in diverse and linguistically rich negotiations while maintaining a tractable, closed-domain environment. Inspired by the literature in human-human negotiations, we annotate persuasion strategies and perform correlation analysis to understand how the dialogue behaviors are associated with the negotiation performance. We further propose and evaluate a multi-task framework to recognize these strategies in a given utterance. We find that multi-task learning substantially improves the performance for all strategy labels, especially for the ones that are the most skewed. We release the dataset, annotations, and the code to propel future work in human-machine negotiations: https://github.com/kushalchawla/CaSiNo

In this work, we describe our system for WNUT-2020 shared task on the identification of informative COVID-19 English tweets. Our system is an ensemble of various machine learning methods, leveraging both traditional feature-based classifiers as well as recent advances in pre-trained language models that help in capturing the syntactic, semantic, and contextual features from the tweets. We further employ pseudo-labelling to incorporate the unlabelled Twitter data released on the pandemic. Our best performing model achieves an F1-score of 0.9179 on the provided validation set and 0.8805 on the blind test-set.

Abstractive text summarization aims at generating human-like summaries by understanding and paraphrasing the given input content. Recent efforts based on sequence-to-sequence networks only allow the generation of a single summary. However, it is often desirable to accommodate the psycho-linguistic preferences of the intended audience while generating the summaries. In this work, we present a reinforcement learning based approach to generate formality-tailored summaries for an input article. Our novel input-dependent reward function aids in training the model with stylistic feedback on sampled and ground-truth summaries together. Once trained, the same model can generate formal and informal summary variants. Our automated and qualitative evaluations show the viability of the proposed framework.

Human communication includes information, opinions and reactions. Reactions are often captured by the affective-messages in written as well as verbal communications. While there has been work in affect modeling and to some extent affective content generation, the area of affective word distributions is not well studied. Synsets and lexica capture semantic relationships across words. These models, however, lack in encoding affective or emotional word interpretations. Our proposed model, Aff2Vec, provides a method for enriched word embeddings that are representative of affective interpretations of words. Aff2Vec outperforms the state-of-the-art in intrinsic word-similarity tasks. Further, the use of Aff2Vec representations outperforms baseline embeddings in downstream natural language understanding tasks including sentiment analysis, personality detection, and frustration prediction.

Email conversations are the primary mode of communication in enterprises. The email content expresses an individual’s needs, requirements and intentions. Affective information in the email text can be used to get an insight into the sender’s mood or emotion. We present a novel approach to model human frustration in text. We identify linguistic features that influence human perception of frustration and model it as a supervised learning task. The paper provides a detailed comparison across traditional regression and word distribution-based models. We report a mean-squared error (MSE) of 0.018 against human-annotated frustration for the best performing model. The approach establishes the importance of affect features in frustration prediction for email data. We further evaluate the efficacy of the proposed feature set and model in predicting other tone or affects in text, namely formality and politeness; results demonstrate a comparable performance against the state-of-the-art baselines.