Evaluating Multi-turn Human-AI Interaction
For researchers and developers of interactive LLM systems, this work highlights the need for human-centered evaluation beyond aggregate metrics, though it is primarily a conceptual proposal without empirical validation.
The paper identifies limitations of current NLP evaluation practices (e.g., accuracy, fluency) for interactive LLMs and proposes TCR, a structured framework emphasizing transparency, consistency, and refinement, demonstrated with educational assistants.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as collaborative assistants, yet dominant NLP evaluation practices remain centered on aggregate metrics such as accuracy and fluency. These approaches often overlook behaviors that are critical in human-facing settings (e.g., consistency across multiple turns and iterative refinement). In this paper, we examine limitations of current NLP evaluation practices and introduce TCR, a structured framework for evaluating human--AI interaction using educational LLM assistants as an illustrative example. TCR emphasizes dimensions such as transparency, consistency, and refinement. We further present structured evaluation prompts and illustrative interaction examples demonstrating how structured evaluation can complement aggregate metrics and LLM-as-a-judge approaches. Our work highlights the need for more human-centered evaluation practices for interactive LLM systems.