Mind the Goal: Data-Efficient Goal-Oriented Evaluation of Conversational Agents and Chatbots using Teacher Models
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks
Abstract (arXiv)
Evaluating the quality of multi-turn chatbot interactions remains challenging, as most existing methods assess interactions at the turn level without addressing whether a user's overarching goal was fulfilled. A ``goal'' here refers to an information need or task, such as asking for policy information or applying for leave. We propose a comprehensive framework for goal-oriented evaluation of multi-agent systems (MAS), introducing the Goal Success Rate (GSR) to measure the percentage of fulfilled goals, and a Root Cause of Failure (RCOF) taxonomy to identify reasons for failure in multi-agent chatbots. Our method segments conversations by user goals and evaluates success using all relevant turns. We present a model-based evaluation system combining teacher LLMs, where domain experts define goals, set quality standards serving as a guidance for the LLMs. The LLMs use ``thinking tokens'' to produce interpretable rationales, enabling textitexplainable, textitdata-efficient evaluations. In an enterprise setting, we apply our framework to evaluate AIDA, a zero-to-one employee conversational agent system built as a ground-up multi-agent conversational agent, and observe GSR improvement from 63% to 79% over six months since its inception. Our framework is generic and offers actionable insights through a detailed defect taxonomy based on analysis of failure points in multi-agent chatbots, diagnosing overall success, identifying key failure modes, and informing system improvements.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 11 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Oct 2025.
Builds on
11 of 27 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 10
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
- 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,182
- 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
- 2020USR: An Unsupervised and Reference Free Evaluation Metric for Dialog Generationcited by 188
- 2019Learning from Dialogue after Deployment: Feed Yourself, Chatbot!cited by 102
- 2025MemInsight: Autonomous Memory Augmentation for LLM Agentscited by 85
- 2023GPTEval: A Survey on Assessments of ChatGPT and GPT-4cited by 73
- 2018Conversational AI: The Science Behind the Alexa Prizecited by 63
- 2022FineD-Eval: Fine-grained Automatic Dialogue-Level Evaluationcited by 13
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026ATOD: An Evaluation Framework and Benchmark for Agentic Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems
- 2026Operationalising Multi-Dimensional Evaluation for Conversational Agents: A Scalable, Governed Pipeline with Selective Re-evaluation and Model Benchmarking
- 2025Goal Alignment in LLM-Based User Simulators for Conversational AI
- 2025Evaluating LLM-based Agents for Multi-Turn Conversations: A Survey
- 2025MEDAL: A Framework for Benchmarking LLMs as Multilingual Open-Domain Dialogue Evaluators
- 2026How to Dogfood Your AI Chat Agent: A Three-Layer Evaluation Framework with Goal-Directed NPC Simulation
- 2025AgentChangeBench: A Multi-Dimensional Evaluation Framework for Goal-Shift Robustness in Conversational AI
- 2024Dialogue You Can Trust: Human and AI Perspectives on Generated Conversations