mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

ReIn: Conversational Error Recovery with Reasoning Inception

arXiv 2602.17022 ↗First posted 19 Feb 2026cs.CL cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Conversational agents powered by large language models (LLMs) with tool integration achieve strong performance on fixed task-oriented dialogue datasets but remain vulnerable to unanticipated, user-induced errors. Rather than focusing on error prevention, this work focuses on error recovery, which necessitates the accurate diagnosis of erroneous dialogue contexts and execution of proper recovery plans. Under realistic constraints precluding model fine-tuning or prompt modification due to significant cost and time requirements, we explore whether agents can recover from contextually flawed interactions and how their behavior can be adapted without altering model parameters and prompts. To this end, we propose Reasoning Inception (ReIn), a test-time intervention method that plants an initial reasoning into the agent's decision-making process. Specifically, an external inception module identifies predefined errors within the dialogue context and generates recovery plans, which are subsequently integrated into the agent's internal reasoning process to guide corrective actions, without modifying its parameters or system prompts. We evaluate ReIn by systematically simulating conversational failure scenarios that directly hinder successful completion of user goals: user's ambiguous and unsupported requests. Across diverse combinations of agent models and inception modules, ReIn substantially improves task success and generalizes to unseen error types. Moreover, it consistently outperforms explicit prompt-modification approaches, underscoring its utility as an efficient, on-the-fly method. In-depth analysis of its operational mechanism, particularly in relation to instruction hierarchy, indicates that jointly defining recovery tools with ReIn can serve as a safe and effective strategy for improving the resilience of conversational agents without modifying the backbone models or system prompts.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 43 of its 57 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Feb 2026.

Builds on

43 of 57 references.

References · 43

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
  3. 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,160
  4. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
  5. 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,317
  6. 2023Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4cited by 2,579
  7. 2020REALM: Retrieval-Augmented Language Model Pre-Trainingcited by 2,126
  8. 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,339
  9. 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,280
  10. 2022Ignore Previous Prompt: Attack Techniques For Language Modelscited by 760
  11. 2024InjecAgent: Benchmarking Indirect Prompt Injections in Tool-Integrated Large Language Model Agentscited by 476
  12. 2024The Instruction Hierarchy: Training LLMs to Prioritize Privileged Instructionscited by 441
31 more
  1. 2025LLMs Get Lost In Multi-Turn Conversationcited by 400
  2. 2020AmbigQA: Answering Ambiguous Open-domain Questionscited by 385
  3. 2023HaluEval: A Large-Scale Hallucination Evaluation Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 329
  4. 2023MINT: Evaluating LLMs in Multi-turn Interaction with Tools and Language Feedbackcited by 293
  5. 2025Survey on Evaluation of LLM-based Agentscited by 190
  6. 2025Adaptive Attacks Break Defenses Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on LLM Agentscited by 112
  7. 2024The Butterfly Effect of Altering Prompts: How Small Changes and Jailbreaks Affect Large Language Model Performancecited by 97
  8. 2023Clarify When Necessary: Resolving Ambiguity Through Interaction with LMscited by 93
  9. 2025Evaluating LLM-based Agents for Multi-Turn Conversations: A Surveycited by 56
  10. 2025Self-Challenging Language Model Agentscited by 56
  11. 2023Are LLMs All You Need for Task-Oriented Dialogue?cited by 52
  12. 2023Consistency Analysis of ChatGPTcited by 37
  13. 2024Defense Against Prompt Injection Attack by Leveraging Attack Techniquescited by 31
  14. 2025ChatBench: From Static Benchmarks to Human-AI Evaluationcited by 31
  15. 2023PlatoLM: Teaching LLMs in Multi-Round Dialogue via a User Simulatorcited by 28
  16. 2025Multi-turn Evaluation of Anthropomorphic Behaviours in Large Language Modelscited by 25
  17. 2020Are Neural Open-Domain Dialog Systems Robust to Speech Recognition Errors in the Dialog History? An Empirical Studycited by 19
  18. 2025User Feedback in Human-LLM Dialogues: A Lens to Understand Users But Noisy as a Learning Signalcited by 19
  19. 2025LongFuncEval: Measuring the effectiveness of long context models for function callingcited by 17
  20. 2024RefuteBench: Evaluating Refuting Instruction-Following for Large Language Modelscited by 10
  21. 2022Enhancing Out-of-Distribution Detection in Natural Language Understanding via Implicit Layer Ensemblecited by 9
  22. 2019Investigation of Error Simulation Techniques for Learning Dialog Policies for Conversational Error Recoverycited by 5
  23. 2023Revealing User Familiarity Bias in Task-Oriented Dialogue via Interactive Evaluationcited by 4
  24. 2020Saying No is An Art: Contextualized Fallback Responses for Unanswerable Dialogue Queriescited by 3
  25. 2021User-Initiated Repetition-Based Recovery in Multi-Utterance Dialogue Systemscited by 3
  26. 2022TAPHSIR: Towards AnaPHoric Ambiguity Detection and ReSolution In Requirementscited by 3
  27. 2024Inconsistent dialogue responses and how to recover from themcited by 3
  28. 2024Red Teaming Language Models for Processing Contradictory Dialoguescited by 3
  29. 2024Generating Hard-Negative Out-of-Scope Data with ChatGPT for Intent Classificationcited by 2
  30. 2020Examining user reviews of conversational systems: a case study of Alexa skillscited by 1
  31. 2024"Stupid robot, I want to speak to a human!" User Frustration Detection in Task-Oriented Dialog Systemscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026When the Database Fails: Prompting LLM Dialogue Agents for Safe Recovery in Task-Oriented Dialogue
  2. 2024ReSpAct: Harmonizing Reasoning, Speaking, and Acting Towards Building Large Language Model-Based Conversational AI Agents
  3. 2024Repairs in a Block World: A New Benchmark for Handling User Corrections with Multi-Modal Language Models
  4. 2025Adaptive Multi-Agent Response Refinement in Conversational Systems
  5. 2025RECAP: REwriting Conversations for Intent Understanding in Agentic Planning
  6. 2024Cohesive Conversations: Enhancing Authenticity in Multi-Agent Simulated Dialogues
  7. 2025When Users Are Happy but Agents Are Wrong: Multi-Dimensional Evaluation of Tool-Augmented Dialogue
  8. 2025A Desideratum for Conversational Agents: Capabilities, Challenges, and Future Directions