mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Toward Anthropomorphic Dialogue: A Closed-Loop Framework for Human-Like Chat Generation, Evaluation, and Preference Alignment

arXiv 2607.17191 ↗First posted 19 Jul 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Human-like private chat requires more than fluent response generation: a system must preserve persona, relationship, memory, bounded knowledge, medium-specific timing, and a coherent multi-turn arc. We present AnthroDial, a closed-loop framework that formulates anthropomorphic dialogue as a joint problem of system architecture, executable evaluation, and diagnostic alignment. It combines (1) a role-conditioned scheduled dialogue runtime with persona and scenario cards, long-term memory, virtual time, and single-draft message decisions; (2) an executable benchmark with an L0 validity gate, five per-turn dimensions, and five dialogue-level dimensions; and (3) a post-training pipeline that filters 16,436 scheduled-decision examples for SFT and applies GRPO with a cognitive-diagnostic, ZPD-aware reward. The reward maintains Kalman-filtered capability estimates for each behavioral dimension, upweights dimensions with larger capability deficits, and uses rollout scores as task-level ZPD matches to focus optimization on learnable weak skills. On a benchmark with 55 personas, 50 scenarios, 50 persona-scenario bindings, and 100 role-conditioned cases per model, we evaluate 16 systems spanning frontier baselines, open models, thinking/no-think variants, and SFT/RL ablations. The strongest non-trained baseline reaches 32.00% strict ACC, while Qwen3.6-27B-SFT+RL reaches 39.00% strict ACC and a 98.5 overall score. In the 9B no-think setting, SFT and RL improve strict ACC from 0.00% to 13.00% and 18.37%. These results show that anthropomorphic dialogue benefits when generation, evaluation, and reward shaping share the same behavioral dimensions.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Jul 2026.

Builds on

10 of 18 references.

References · 10

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
  3. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
  4. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
  5. 2022Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructionscited by 2,674
  6. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,205
  7. 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,151
  8. 2020Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckListcited by 979
  9. 2018Personalizing Dialogue Agents: I have a dog, do you have pets too?cited by 820
  10. 2024ORPO: Monolithic Preference Optimization without Reference Modelcited by 556

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025REALTALK: A 21-Day Real-World Dataset for Long-Term Conversation
  2. 2026MirrorBench: A Benchmark to Evaluate Conversational User-Proxy Agents for Human-Likeness
  3. 2026PragAlign: Feedback-Guided Pragmatic Alignment for Controlled Synthetic Dialogue Generation
  4. 2025The Era of Real-World Human Interaction: RL from User Conversations
  5. 2026HAL: Inducing Human-likeness in LLMs with Alignment
  6. 2026A Scoping Review of the Ethical Perspectives on Anthropomorphising Large Language Model-Based Conversational Agents
  7. 2026ATOD: An Evaluation Framework and Benchmark for Agentic Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems
  8. 2026Learning to Simulate Human Dialogue