While Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized text-based role-playing, creating immersive Speech Role-Playing Agents (SRPAs) requires a seamless bridge between cognitive reasoning and paralinguistic nuances. Current SRPAs primarily rely on end-to-end (E2E) fine-tuning. However, this paradigm suffers from poor generalization to unseen characters due to its reliance on role-specific data, while imposing a "modality alignment tax" that degrades intrinsic LLM reasoning capabilities. We propose DeSRPA, an agentic framework for character role play via inference-time intervention on frozen backbones. DeSRPA employs a dual-level control vector mechanism, Internal Cognitive Steering and External Expressive Rendering, to synchronize "mind" and "voice". Experiments on SpeechRole and OmniCharacter benchmarks demonstrate that DeSRPA significantly outperforms E2E baselines in personality and emotional consistency. It achieves high speech naturalness, narrowing the gap with proprietary models like GPT-4o Audio, while remaining a scalable and training-free paradigm.
Speech-to-speech dialogue models increasingly support persona control, yet existing spoken role-playing benchmarks remain largely character-centric and short-horizon. This leaves open whether spoken dialogue models can sustain diverse roles over extended interactions, especially beyond predefined fictional characters. We introduce RoleBreak, an open benchmark for long-horizon role-playing robustness in spoken dialogue. RoleBreak contains 310 character-based and user-centered roles, 6,688 human-verified dialogue turns, and 11,743 fine-grained evaluation criteria, with 1,856 turns carrying expressive emotion targets for evaluating vocal emotion. Its scenarios are designed to stress role consistency, interaction quality, safety, and affect over extended conversations. We evaluate nine configurations spanning full-duplex, omni-modal, and cascaded ASR--LLM--TTS paradigms. We find four key patterns. First, current systems are substantially stronger at semantic role adherence than at vocal emotion. Second, semantic robustness remains brittle over long interactions: even the strongest evaluated system encounters its first persona and safety failures after only 10.4 and 11.6 turns on average. Third, scaling the LLM substantially improves semantic robustness and delays failure, but yields little improvement in vocal emotion. Finally, user vocal emotion affects role-playing behavior even when linguistic content is fixed. These findings highlight persistent gaps in both long-horizon robustness and vocal expressiveness in spoken role-playing systems.
Building general-purpose role-playing agents that faithfully portray any character from a natural-language profile remains challenging. The dominant paradigm -- supervised fine-tuning -- encourages behavioral mimicry without deep, human-like internal thought processes, resulting in poor out-of-distribution generalization. Therefore, we propose \textbf{Psy-CoT}, a psychology-grounded chain-of-thought framework that decomposes pre-response reasoning into three role-specific steps -- \emph{Interaction Perception}, \emph{Psychological Empathy}, and \emph{Logical Construction} -- so that the model \emph{thinks dynamically} from the profile rather than merely mimicking surface patterns. While structured reasoning provides a foundation, it alone is insufficient; reinforcement learning is essential to further align the model with character fidelity. However, we observe that under LLM-based reward models, both generic phrases that hack the reward model and genuinely role-specific phrases receive identical gradient signals -- this hacking accumulates over training, misleading the model into treating both as equally optimal choices. To address this, we propose \textbf{Role-Aware Policy Optimization (RAPO)}, which uses profile--token mutual information to weight gradients asymmetrically -- amplifying role-specific tokens under positive advantage while attenuating them under negative advantage. Experiments on CoSER, CharacterBench, and CharacterEval demonstrate that Psy-CoT outperforms existing role-playing CoT methods, and RAPO consistently surpasses GRPO across multiple model scales.
Recent advancements in Reinforcement Learning (RL), particularly Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), have significantly enhanced the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models. However, applying these problem-centric optimization methods to role-playing agents often leads to a loss of character fidelity and style collapse, as they prioritize context-specific utility over persona alignment. To address this, we propose Character-Centric Group Relative Policy Optimization (CRPO), a framework designed to realign RL objectives with the role-playing task. CRPO improves character distinctiveness through three mechanisms: decoupling task logic from stylistic rewards to resolve gradient conflicts, dynamically adapting optimization constraints based on character complexity, and utilizing generic responses as negative baselines to prevent the model from reverting to a common distribution. Extensive experiments demonstrate that CRPO outperforms existing methods in consistency, emotion and others.