Turn-taking modeling is fundamental to spoken dialogue systems, yet its evaluation remains fragmented and often limited to binary boundary detection under narrow interaction settings. Such protocols hinder systematic comparison and obscure model weaknesses across conversational conditions. We present CoDeTT, a context-aware decision benchmark for turn-taking evaluation. CoDeTT formulates turn-taking as a structured decision problem and constructs a multi-scenario dataset with fine-grained decision categories and controlled context variations. Under a unified evaluation protocol, we assess representative existing models and observe substantial performance disparities across decision types and interaction scenarios. CoDeTT provides a standardized benchmark for systematic and context-aware evaluation of turn-taking systems. The benchmark dataset and evaluation toolkit are available at https://yingaowang-casia.github.io/CoDeTT.github.io/.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: A conceptual comparison between traditional action-based benchmarks and the proposed CoDeTT intent-based diagnostic benchmark.
System state
Decision strategy
Scenario
Number of Samples
Operational cue (summary)
SystemSpeaking
Maintain
Backchannel
1,000(real) + 1,000(syn)
User produces short non-floor-taking feedback (e.g., “uh-huh”).
Speakers in natural conversation take turns speaking and listening, deciding in real time when to take, hold, or yield the floor. However, turn-taking evaluation remains limited due to the lack of a consistent, linguistically grounded evaluation protocol and hand-annotated data covering diverse conversation types. To address this, we present TurnBench, a multi-domain benchmark that pairs a 30-hour, hand-labeled corpus of dyadic human conversation with a standardized evaluation protocol for end-of-turn and interruption detection. We set conversation type as a controllable experimental variable, covering six distinct interaction styles, and triple-annotate each conversation. Benchmarking 14 heterogeneous turn-taking systems, we find end-of-turn recall stable across types, while interruption false positives are strongly type-dependent and concentrated in backchannel-dense interaction styles. Although in smooth floor transfers human listeners begin speaking a median 151 ms before the current turn ends, no current system performs equivalently without incurring excessive false positives. We release our corpus, a 104-hour training set, and a public leaderboard with an interactive dataset viewer at https://turnbench.sesame.com.
Turn-taking naturalness is central to full-duplex spoken dialogue systems, yet its automatic evaluation remains limited. Existing evaluations often rely on human judgments or behavior-specific timing metrics, making it difficult to compare heterogeneous timing failures within a unified framework. We propose TurnNat, a likelihood-based framework for automatic turn-taking naturalness evaluation in two-channel spoken dialogue. A causal turn-taking prediction model trained on natural conversations estimates future two-speaker voice-activity states, and the negative log-likelihood (NLL) of the observed future activity measures timing atypicality. TurnNat pools frame-level NLLs over turn-taking boundary units (TBUs) extracted from utterance onsets and offsets, and aggregates mean and tail TBU scores into a dialogue-level naturalness score. We further construct a controlled perturbation benchmark of paired natural and perturbed dialogue clips, validated by human naturalness judgments. Experiments on this benchmark show that TurnNat successfully identifies unnatural turn-taking perturbations across heterogeneous timing failures.
Hao Zhang, Thomas Thebaud, Georgi Tinchev +2
Center for Language and Speech Processing, Johns Hopkins University, USA · Amazon Research, UK · Amazon, USA
Real-time spoken dialogue systems must distinguish interruptions that require yielding the floor from backchannels that permit continued speaking. Existing benchmarks typically score events independently and may therefore assign high scores to systems with fixed action preferences rather than context-sensitive decision policies. We introduce ECHO, a paired diagnostic benchmark for Chinese turn-taking evaluation. ECHO pairs examples with the same overlap transcript but contrasting preceding multi-turn dialogue contexts, with one requiring Yield and the other Keep. It additionally includes off-talk examples for diagnosing unnecessary yielding. We introduce pair accuracy, which requires correct decisions on both members of a pair and assigns no credit to constant-action policies. Experiments on four speech systems show that three exhibit a severe over-yielding bias: they correctly keep the floor on fewer than 13% of backchannels, resulting in near-zero pairwise success rates equal or less than 4%. While the remaining system remains comparatively balanced across contexts, these findings broadly demonstrate that interruption-only evaluation can severely overestimate practical turn-taking reliability.