cs.CLMay 15, 2026

SKG-Eval: Stateful Evaluation of Multi-Turn Dialogue via Incremental Semantic Knowledge Graphs

Authors: Avijit Shil, Suman Samui

Abstract

Evaluating multi-turn dialogue systems remains challenging because response quality depends not only on the current prompt, but also on previously established entities, claims, and conversational commitments. Existing automatic evaluators, including LLM-as-a-judge frameworks and embedding-based metrics, largely rely on flat or turn-isolated representations, making them less effective at detecting long-range issues such as contradiction, topic drift, and entity inconsistency. To address this, we propose SKG-Eval, a quasi-deterministic and interpretable framework that models dialogue as an evolving Semantic Knowledge Graph (SKG) of entities, relations, and commitments across turns. The framework incrementally updates the graph through structured triple extraction and computes three complementary signals: (i) local relevance, measuring alignment with the current prompt and optional reference; (ii) historical consistency, evaluating how newly introduced information connects to prior conversational context using graph-based and embedding-driven signals; and (iii) logical coherence, assessed by a geometric contradiction engine that detects cross-turn conflicts without relying on NLI models or LLM judges. These signals are adaptively fused and aggregated into a length-invariant session score via recency-weighted trend analysis. Across multiple benchmarks, SKG-Eval achieves higher correlation with human judgments and substantially improves detection of long-range inconsistencies in extended conversations. In addition, the framework produces explicit contradiction certificates and deterministic scores for fixed inputs, enabling reproducible and auditable evaluation. Overall, our results suggest that structured externalized state tracking through semantic knowledge graphs provides a scalable alternative to implicit reasoning in LLM-based dialogue evaluators.

Explore similar work

CardsList
Jun 10, 2026cs.CL

Measuring Semantic Progress in Multi-turn Dialogue via Information Gain

Evaluating multi-turn dialogue is challenging because quality emerges across turns rather than within individual responses. We focus on a key dimension of information-seeking dialogue: semantic progress, defined as the accumulation of new, question-relevant, and non-redundant information over the course of a conversation. We formalize semantic progress as question-conditioned uncertainty reduction and introduce an information-theoretic metric that approximates it in embedding space. Our main estimator uses a tractable Gaussian formulation with closed-form updates, while a complementary maximum-entropy argument shows why log-determinant structure arises more broadly when only second-order embedding information is retained. This formulation yields desirable theoretical properties, including monotonicity, additive decomposition of total information gain across turns, and diminishing returns for redundant evidence. Unlike LLM-as-a-judge approaches, our metric requires no autoregressive inference at evaluation time and is fully reproducible for a fixed embedding model. Experiments on MT-Bench, Chatbot Arena, and UltraFeedback show that the proposed metric achieves competitive agreement with human judgments despite targeting only semantic progress, with improved alignment on MT-Bench and UltraFeedback compared to several LLM-based judges. Notably, the method remains effective with lightweight embedding models under CPU-only execution, indicating that semantic progress can be captured without reliance on large model capacity.
Paul He, Shiva Kasiviswanathan, Dominik Janzing
Topic pending
AskPDF
May 14, 2026cs.CL

Improving Multi-turn Dialogue Consistency with Self-Recall Thinking

Large language model (LLM) based multi-turn dialogue systems often struggle to track dependencies across non-adjacent turns, undermining both consistency and scalability. As conversations lengthen, essential information becomes sparse and is buried in irrelevant context, while processing the entire dialogue history incurs severe efficiency bottlenecks. Existing solutions either rely on high latency external memory or lose fine-grained details through iterative summarization. In this paper, we propose Self-Recall Thinking (SRT), a framework designed to address long-range contextual dependency and sparse informative signals in multi-turn dialogue. SRT identifies helpful historical turns and uses them to generate contextually appropriate responses, enabling the model to selectively recall and reason over context during inference. This process yields an endogenous reasoning process that integrates interpretable recall steps without external modules. SRT incorporates: (1) Dependency Construction: Generating and converting it into self-recall chains; (2)Capability Initialization: Training to enable reasoning chains with recall tokens capability; (3)Reasoning Improvement: Refining accuracy via verifiable rewards to optimize recall and reasoning for correct answers. Experiments on multiple datasets demonstrate that SRT improves F1 score by 4.7% and reduces end-to-end latency by 14.7% over prior methods, achieving a balance between reasoning latency and accuracy, and outperforming state-of-the-art baselines.
Renning Pang, Tian Lan, Leyuan Liu +3
Event-Grounded Multi-Turn ConversationsEfficient Long-Context InferenceRetrieval RecallInference LatencyLong-Range Temporal Dependencies
AskPDF
Aug 31, 2026cs.AI

SAGE: State-Grounded, Abstention-Aware Evaluation of Task-Oriented Dialogue Agents

Evaluating task-oriented dialogue agents requires judging not merely whether a reply reads well but whether each turn advances the underlying workflow state correctly--a distinction conventional holistic LLM judges can miss because they evaluate the available context as a single unit and require one or more full-model calls per turn. We propose SAGE (State-Grounded Abstention-Aware Evaluation), which compiles a workflow specification and per-turn state diff into atomic, schema-grounded criteria and routes each through a cascade of symbolic and encoder/NLI verifiers that abstain rather than guess, aggregating criterion verdicts into a turn-level decision with an evidence trace. Its recommended operating point, SAGE-Core, decides 81--91% of criteria with only the compiler, symbolic rules, and on-device encoders--at zero paid LLM cost--while SAGE-LLM adds an optional focused-LLM fallback for open-class criteria. Across four slices spanning MultiWOZ, Schema-Guided Dialogue, and ABCD, no evaluated LLM-as-a-judge baseline--including a state-aware GPT-4.1 judge and cheaper GPT-4.1-mini variants--significantly exceeds SAGE-Core on any slice, even though the GPT-4.1 G-Eval judge costs 4.7−−8.0per1,000turnstoSAGE−Core′s4.7--8.0 per 1,000 turns to SAGE-Core's 0. A two-annotator human audit (n=200, κκ=0.94) confirms strong label fidelity on the transcript-visible failure classes--where, excluding the weak-salience IUV class, SAGE-Core is statistically tied with the strongest LLM judge--and honestly scopes ignored-user-value as a state-consistency signal with weak broad-human salience. We analyze construct-validity limits from injected failures and partial symbolic circularity.
Rayan Khoury, Shih-Yao Lin, Pratyush Mishra
Dialogue SystemsLarge Language Model JudgesDecision-Aware EvaluationLarge Language Model Serving
AskPDF