Gaze as Evidence for Common Grounding: A Cross-Corpus Analysis of MapTask and MUNDEX

Robot gaze is a major component of human-robot dialogue coordination. Most studies of gaze in human-robot dialogue focus on face-to-face social conversations, but little is known about gaze in demanding task-focused interactions. In this paper, we investigate how the gaze of a robot game partner affects human visual attention and if humans tend to direct confirmation-seeking gazes towards the robot. In our study, we let participants play a collaborative word association game with a NAO robot acting as an embodied, LLM-driven conversational partner. Our experiments are conducted under two conditions, which implement mutual and referential gazes of the robot respectively. We record participants' gaze using eye tracking glasses and analyze the interactions using gaze coordinates, speech segments, key events and areas of interests. We find that robot gaze orientation does not affect the time to first fixation on words the robot proposed. We also find that participants gaze more often at the robot when their dialogue line contains confirmation requests, compared to when it does not. Our results indicate (likely also due to the cognitively demanding nature of the game) that the verbal aspect of this task overshadows the effects of referential robot gaze. These findings offer valuable insights for designing and validating robot gaze and turn-taking behavior in collaborative tasks which require coordination and efficient communication.

In collaborative dialogue, shared perception does not guarantee shared interpretation. Mutual understanding must be established through interaction. We investigate whether vision-language models (VLMs) can distinguish what could be shared from what has been shared between dialogue participants through grounding. We formulate this as an interpretation-matching task on 13,077 annotated reference expressions from HCRC MapTask dialogues, and evaluate VLMs under systematically controlled manipulations of dialogue context and map-information access. Our results show that providing authentic map images improves overall performance but shifts models toward over-predicting alignment. Textual descriptions of the same map content reproduce this bias, while non-informative images suppress alignment predictions entirely, indicating that the bias is driven by task-relevant map content, not the visual channel. This improvement comes at the cost of degraded accuracy on non-aligned cases. Calibration analysis and reference-chain tracking further suggest that models rely on static referential cues on the maps rather than tracking how grounding unfolds through dialogue history. We observe these patterns most clearly in Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct and, to varying degrees, in four additional models from two architecture families. In models that exhibit the bias, map content, whether presented visually or textually, is treated as evidence of mutual understanding, conflating potential with established common ground.

Situated language use is multimodal and embodied. For example, gestures can carry information that is absent or underspecified in the speech signal, yet dialogue models typically rely on transcripts alone. We study how much referential information gestures and their combination with speech carry in multimodal dialogue under different partner visibility conditions. % We build models that identify the intended referent in a video-mediated referential communication game based on either the speech transcript, the skeletal representation of gesture, or both modalities. Our results show that gesture alone is predictive of the intended referent and that multimodal fusion is most beneficial when the transcript-based model is uncertain. Training-only alignment of learned representations with the referent image further improves the fusion model performance. % In a comparison with human interaction data, we further see pragmatic effects of interlocutor visibility on gesture production and informativeness as well as an entrainment effect in speech and multimodal, but not gesture, performance across rounds of repeated interaction. We thus make contributions to the technical modelling of multimodal information in human dialogue and the analysis of human interaction data via trained model representations.