Leveraging Speech Acts for Low-Data and Cross-Domain Conversation Derailment Forecasting

Forecasting conversational derailment is the task of predicting, as the conversation unfolds, whether it will eventually derail into personal attacks. Since forecasting models operate in an online fashion, they must decide whether to "trigger" an alert after each utterance--for example, to notify participants or a moderator that the conversation is at risk of derailing. Existing approaches make this decision solely based on the estimated likelihood of derailment given the preceding utterances, implicitly assuming that the conversation's future trajectory is fixed. As a result, they ignore the possibility of future recovery and incur an unnecessarily high rate of false positives. In this work we propose a method for decoupling the decision to trigger from derailment likelihood estimation. Our approach is inspired by the first human baseline on this task, which shows that humans achieve dramatically lower false positive rates by selectively deferring their decision to trigger when they anticipate that tension is likely to subside. We operationalize this insight with a deferral mechanism that uses forward-looking simulations to assess whether a tense moment admits plausible paths to recovery. Incorporating this mechanism into a state-of-the-art forecasting model substantially reduces false positives without sacrificing forecasting accuracy. More broadly, this work highlights the value of treating decision-making as a first-class component of forecasting systems.

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at generating contextually appropriate responses but remain poorly calibrated for multi-party conversations, where deciding when to speak is as critical as what to say. In such settings, naively responding at every turn leads to excessive interruptions and degraded conversational coherence. We introduce When2Speak, a grounded synthetic dataset and four-stage generation pipeline for learning intervention timing in group interactions. The dataset comprises over 215,000 examples derived from 16,000 conversations involving 2-6 speakers, spanning diverse conversational styles, tones, and participant dynamics, and explicitly modeling SPEAK vs. SILENT decisions at each turn. Our pipeline combines real-world grounding, structured augmentation, controlled transcript synthesis, and fine-tuning-ready supervision, and is fully open-sourced to support reproducibility and adaptation to domain-specific conversational norms. Across multiple model families, supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on When2Speak significantly outperforms zero-shot baselines (e.g., the average Macro F1 increase across 4B+ parameter models was 60%, with the largest increase being 120%). However, SFT-trained models remain systematically over-conservative, missing nearly half of warranted interventions as seen through the Missed Intervention Rate (MIR), which was on average 0.50 and is noticed even at larger model sizes. To address this limitation, we apply reinforcement learning with asymmetric reward shaping, which reduces MIR to 0.186-0.218 and increases recall from 0.479 to 0.78-0.81. Our findings establish that temporal participation is a distinct and trainable dimension of conversational intelligence, and that grounded synthetic data provides an effective and scalable pathway for enabling LLMs to participate more naturally and appropriately in multi-party interactions.

Meeting continuation requires tracking the agenda, speaker roles, participant intentions, and disagreement across long multi-party discussions. We introduce the Meeting Dynamic Forecasting Benchmark (MDFB), constructed from 2,207 real-world meetings and 24,794 future-facing queries. Given a transcript prefix and an active question, a model generates a plausible multi-turn continuation in one call. We evaluate utility---progress toward the question---and human-likeness---plausible conversational flow and role consistency---without requiring exact reproduction of the observed future. We further present GLARE, an adaptation of adversarial imitation learning to conditional language generation. A discriminator ranks the observed continuation above samples from the current actor, and its score supplies a KL-regularized policy reward; retraining on current-policy negatives allows the reward landscape to evolve with the actor. GLARE attains average human-evaluated win rates of 0.66 on utility and 0.70 on human-likeness, outperforming SFT and SPIN while remaining below the observed human continuation. We also demonstrate MDFB as a social reasoning arena for comparing general-purpose models, including closed-source systems, through reference-assisted judgments. Together, these studies illustrate the benchmark's use for both task-specific learning and output-based evaluation of meeting behavior.