mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Behavioral and Symbolic Fillers as Delay Mitigation for Embodied Conversational Agents in Virtual Reality

arXiv 2508.11781 ↗First posted 15 Aug 2025cs.HCcited by 1

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Social simulation and multi-agent debate

Abstract (arXiv)

When communicating with embodied conversational agents (ECAs) in virtual reality, there might be delays in the responses of the agents lasting several seconds, for example, due to more extensive computations of the answers when large language models are used. Such delays might lead to unnatural or frustrating interactions. In this paper, we investigate filler types to mitigate these effects and lead to a more positive experience and perception of the agent. In a within-subject study, we asked 24 participants to communicate with ECAs in virtual reality, comparing four strategies displayed during the delays: a multimodal behavioral filler consisting of conversational and gestural fillers, a base condition with only idle motions, and two symbolic indicators with progress bars, one embedded as a badge on the agent, the other one external and visualized as a thinking bubble. Our results indicate that the behavioral filler improved perceived response time, three subscales of presence, humanlikeness, and naturalness. Participants looked away from the face more often when symbolic indicators were displayed, but the visualizations did not lead to a more positive impression of the agent or to increased presence. The majority of participants preferred the behavioral fillers, only 12.5% and 4.2% favored the symbolic embedded and external conditions, respectively.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 2 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Aug 2025.

Builds on

2 of 40 references.

References · 2

  1. 2024Takeaways from Applying LLM Capabilities to Multiple Conversational Avatars in a VR Pilot Studycited by 7
  2. 2015On data skewness, stragglers, and MapReduce progress indicatorscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Mitigating Response Delays in Free-Form Conversations with LLM-powered Intelligent Virtual Agents
  2. 2025Talking Surveys: How Photorealistic Embodied Conversational Agents Shape Response Quality, Engagement, and Satisfaction
  3. 2025To Embody or Not: The Effect Of Embodiment On User Perception Of LLM-based Conversational Agents
  4. 2024The influence of persona and conversational task on social interactions with a LLM-controlled embodied conversational agent
  5. 2024Artificial social influence via human-embodied AI agent interaction in immersive virtual reality (VR): Effects of similarity-matching during health conversations
  6. 2026E3VA: Enhancing Emotional Expressiveness in Virtual Conversational Agents
  7. 2025ViBES: A Conversational Agent with Behaviorally-Intelligent 3D Virtual Body
  8. 2026Toward Natural and Companionable Virtual Agents via Cross-Temporal Emotional Modeling