cs.CLSep 25, 2026

Do we need to answer that question? Salience and Answerability of Potential Questions in Naturalistic Dialogue

Authors: Amandine Decker, Maxime Amblard, Ellen Breitholtz

Organizations: LORIA, UL, CNRS, SEMAGRAMME, GU · Université de Lorraine, CNRS, Inria, LORIA, F-54000 Nancy, France · University of Gothenburg, CLASP · SEMAGRAMME, LORIA · 

Abstract

We empirically investigate Question Under Discussion based modelling in naturalistic dialogue by studying whether the salience of generated potential questions predicts their subsequent resolution. Building on Wu et al. (2024), we construct a dataset of 7,124 questions automatically generated from utterances and preceding context from the British National Corpus, and annotated for salience and answerability. We find a robust but low positive correlation between salience and answerability in dialogue, indicating that more salient questions are more likely to be addressed. However, this effect is markedly weaker than in monologic text, suggesting that conversational structure is less predictable. We further observe that structured interactions exhibit stronger alignment between annotators than less organised dialogues.

Explore similar work

Aug 11, 2025

Conversational DNA: A Visual Language and Interactive Atlas of Human and AI Dialogue

What makes a conversation hold together when its participants speak across one another? Topic maps offer one view, but they leave the relationships between contributions difficult to inspect. We present Conversational DNA, a visual language and interactive atlas for exploring human and AI dialogue. Speaker strands preserve participation, communicative bases mark moves, and directed pairings connect responses to their targets. Adjustable helix geometry makes speaker switching, response distance, and contribution length visible. Across eight corpora containing 1.57 million source records, the atlas maps 151,489 indexed episodes and connects cohort comparison to source transcripts, local structural alignment, and recorded reply alternatives. On 189 held-out Molweni motif queries, adding target correspondence improves precision@5 from 58.8% to 77.2% for exact annotated structure. Case readings illustrate interleaved participation, delayed responses, and the influence of annotation coverage on apparent collection differences. The system supports a view of conversation as jointly organized activity, with visual patterns serving as starting points for examining evidence rather than substitutes for interpretation.
Oct 6, 2026

Knowing When Not to Answer: Cross-Domain and Multi-Turn Generalization of Latent Underspecification Signals

Large language models routinely answer questions that cannot be answered from the information given, and in dialogue they answer before enough has been said. Unanswerability is linearly decodable from hidden states, but it is unclear which of its forms share a representation and whether the signal is useful in dialogue. We contribute a turn-labeled multi-turn benchmark (423 conversations, 1,661 labeled turn-states) and an evaluation harness with a simulated user who answers clarifying questions, and use them with six datasets and six open-weight LLMs to test how far probes for unanswerability carry. Probes transfer robustly between datasets that share a ground of unanswerability: missing information in math (AUROC 0.77-0.97) and in a passage (SQuAD 2.0<->MuSiQue, 0.77-0.90). Probes for epistemic "known-unknowns" transfer poorly to math, but this separation weakens under lexical controls and changes with layer and coordinate system, so it remains unresolved. Single-turn probes fail zero-shot to detect when a conversation becomes answerable; in-structure probes recover it, but no better than a bag-of-words classifier. A gate on the calibrated probe, with no model fine-tuning, fires on underspecified turns far more precisely than chance, and its end-task success comes within 0.08 of a gate given the true labels. Yet across four models it does not reliably beat vanilla generation or prompted consolidation. The remaining gap lies mostly in how models use a clarification, not in detection.
Apr 16, 2026

DiscoTrace: Representing and Comparing Answering Strategies of Humans and LLMs in Information-Seeking Question Answering

We introduce DiscoTrace, a method to identify the rhetorical strategies answerers use when responding to information-seeking questions. DiscoTrace represents answers as a sequence of question-related discourse acts paired with interpretations of the original question, annotated on top of rhetorical structure theory parses. Applying DiscoTrace to answers from nine different communities reveals that communities have diverse preferences for answer construction. In contrast, LLMs do not exhibit rhetorical diversity in their answers, even when prompted to mimic specific human community answering guidelines. LLMs also systematically opt for breadth, addressing interpretations of questions that human answerers choose not to address. The rich, community-sensitive answering behavior structurally revealed by DiscoTrace can guide the development of pragmatic LLM answerers that are more attuned to contextual information needs.