Spencer W. Ng

Xiaoyan Zhao, Yang Deng, Wenjie Wang et al.

Conversational Recommender Systems (CRSs) engage users in multi-turn interactions to deliver personalized recommendations. The emergence of large language models (LLMs) further enhances these systems by enabling more natural and dynamic user interactions. However, a key challenge remains in understanding how personality traits shape conversational recommendation outcomes. Psychological evidence highlights the influence of personality traits on user interaction behaviors. To address this, we introduce an LLM-based personality-aware user simulation for CRSs (PerCRS). The user agent induces customizable personality traits and preferences, while the system agent possesses the persuasion capability to simulate realistic interaction in CRSs. We incorporate multi-aspect evaluation to ensure robustness and conduct extensive analysis from both user and system perspectives. Experimental results demonstrate that state-of-the-art LLMs can effectively generate diverse user responses aligned with specified personality traits, thereby prompting CRSs to dynamically adjust their recommendation strategies. Our experimental analysis offers empirical insights into the impact of personality traits on the outcomes of conversational recommender systems.

James Xu Zhao, Jimmy Z. J. Liu, Bryan Hooi et al.

Large language models (LLMs) are widely used for long-form text generation. However, factual errors in the responses would undermine their reliability. Despite growing attention to LLM factuality, the effect of response length on factuality remains underexplored. In this work, we systematically investigate this relationship by first introducing an automatic and bi-level long-form factuality evaluation framework, which achieves high agreement with human annotations while being cost-effective. Using this framework, we conduct controlled experiments and find that longer responses exhibit lower factual precision, confirming the presence of length bias. To explain this phenomenon, we empirically examine three hypotheses: error propagation, long context, and facts exhaustion. Our results reveal that facts exhaustion, where the model gradually exhausts more reliable knowledge, is the primary cause of factual degradation, rather than the other two hypotheses.