UP-NRPA: User Portrait based Nested Rollout Policy Adaptation for Planning with Large Language Models in Goal-oriented Dialogue Systems

Prior work has shown that large language models can express diverse personality traits in open-ended text generation, but it is unclear whether they can do so in goal-directed dialogue without harming task completion, and whether adapting to a user's personality improves the interaction. We study these questions in task-oriented dialogue (TOD) with a training-free framework in which a personality-conditioned user agent interacts with a system agent under three conditions: Neutral (no personality information), Try (adapt to cues observed in the dialogue), and Oracle (the user's trait label is given explicitly). Across GPT-4o, Qwen3-Next-80B, and Gemini 2.0 Flash, two Schema-Guided Dialogue domains, and ten Big Five poles (9,000 dialogues), each scored by two independent LLM judges, user agents express most traits while task performance remains high (89.94% completion, 85.27% success). The exceptions are introversive and closed users: these traits manifest mainly as absent behavior and are rarely detected. Both adaptive conditions improve pairwise user satisfaction and lower truthfulness, revealing a personalization-grounding trade-off, but only cue-responsive Try also improves constraint satisfaction and inform rate. How adaptation is implemented matters: Oracle's gains depend on how visibly the trait is expressed, and for disagreeable users the label leads Qwen3 and Gemini to mirror hostility. Try avoids this failure, its satisfaction gains do not depend on trait visibility, and it is preferred over Oracle overall. A 175-pair human study supports the reliability of the LLM judges: on clear-winner cases, annotators agree with the satisfaction judges more often than with each other (76.3% vs. 65.1% agreement). Our results suggest that responding to observable behavior is a more robust basis for social adaptation than conditioning on psychological labels.

Dialogue systems in e-commerce scenarios often need to satisfy multiple objectives: accurately reasoning over user profiles (e.g., eligibility, credit limit) to ensure correct decision-making and user state interpretation, while also generating natural and faithful responses. These goals are complementary but not identical. In this work, we propose MORE, an adaptive Multi-Objective REinforcement learning framework that jointly optimizes reasoning accuracy and linguistic naturalness. Our preliminary experiments show that directly mixing rewards with diverging optimization dynamics can cause oscillations and unstable learning. Thus, instead of optimizing a single mixed reward, we treat reasoning functions as constraints that guide policy optimization. At inference time, the system directly generates responses without explicit reasoning steps, while still benefiting from reasoning-enhanced scaffold and avoiding additional inference overhead. To better balance linguistic objectives during response generation, we introduce an adaptive multi-reward mechanism that aggregates signals such as fluency and naturalness and dynamically reweighs them via gradient feedback. We evaluate MORE on two real-world dialogue systems at ByteDance and the MultiWOZ 2.2 benchmark, where it consistently outperforms strong baselines. In 14-day online experiments on ByteDance production traffic, MORE improves overall and reached conversion by 16.53% and 30.09%, while increasing user satisfaction and reducing handoff rates. Notably, in a human-machine comparison, MORE recovers about 60% of the incremental conversion lift achieved by human agents.

Proactive dialogue agents must guide multi-turn interactions toward task goals while adapting to users whose intentions and attitudes evolve. Existing planners improve system side action selection through search, learned policies, or user aware planning, but are often trained and evaluated against fixed or overly compliant simulators; as a result, high simulated success can reflect soft user bias rather than robust dialogue ability. We introduce MASP, a Mentalized Adversarial Self Play framework that treats proactive dialogue as a partially observable game between a system and a rationally resisting user. MASP represents the user's evolving mental state with a BDI based latent state, separates reward side teacher mentalization from policy side student mentalization, and alternates self play updates for the system and user policies. This turns robustness to rational resistance into a training objective rather than only an evaluation condition. Across diverse proactive dialogue benchmarks, compared with the widely used SFT and Planner-only approaches, MASP substantially improves success rate (SR) and rationality constrained success (RCSR), reduces average turns (AT), and performs better against hard users who make the task goal more difficult to achieve.