Empathy

Activation steering has been used to control traits such as honesty, refusal, and sycophancy, yet supportive empathy is evaluated along multiple dimensions that need not correspond to independently controllable activation directions. Using the EPITOME framework, which decomposes supportive empathy into Emotional Reactions, Interpretations, and Explorations, we study three instruction-tuned LLMs and ask whether candidate directions derived from these labels produce distinguishable intervention effects or instead share structure, and how persona prompts interact with those directions. We find that contrastive activation addition yields a stable middle-layer intervention that consistently shifts the EPITOME proxy scores across models, moving empathy analysis beyond response-level scoring. However, the recovered directions are only partially separable: steering one direction induces off-target shifts, and hand-crafted prompting shifts the empathy profile rather than isolating a single dimension. Persona prompts substantially change EPITOME scores, but a paired activation-shift decomposition shows that the recovered subspace captures only approximately 3 percent of persona-induced squared activation-shift magnitude at layer 15. Under this EPITOME-based definition, expressed empathy is steerable but multi-axial, and controlling persona-conditioned empathy requires targeting structure beyond individual mechanism directions.

Empathetic response generation in spoken dialogue systems requires both accurate emotion perception and appropriate emotion regulation. Grounded in psychological theories such as the Perception-Action Model and emotion regulation theory, effective empathy depends not only on inferring a user's affective state but also on regulating how it is expressed in responses. However, recent large audio-language models (LALMs) largely treat emotion as a direct conditioning signal, lacking explicit regulatory mechanisms, which often leads to affect mirroring rather than calibrated support. We propose ER-EDF, a psychology-grounded framework that explicitly decouples emotion perception and emotion regulation in LALMs. Perception tracks the user's emotional state, while regulation determines how this state should guide empathetic response generation. The framework is model-agnostic and integrates seamlessly into existing LALMs. We further construct a spoken empathetic dialogue dataset and introduce empathy-aware evaluation metrics beyond lexical matching. Experiments across five LALMs and two datasets show that ER-EDF consistently improves empathetic response quality in both automatic and human evaluations, highlighting the importance of jointly modeling emotion perception and regulation in spoken empathetic dialogue systems, paving a new direction for psychologically grounded empathetic AI.

Large language models have demonstrated conversational capabilities, yet empathetic competence remains challenging. Empathetic support is inherently multi-turn and path-dependent: users disclose concerns gradually, emotions evolve over time, and early responses shape trust and receptivity. Reinforcement learning with verifiable emotion rewards provides scalable supervision for long-horizon interactions. However, existing methods evolve the dialogue policy while keeping its training interaction distribution fixed, creating a mismatch between policy competence and training experience. We introduce a dual-loop self-evolution framework driven by verifiable emotion feedback. With the user simulator and verifier frozen, the inner loop optimizes the multi-turn policy using continuous emotion rewards, while the outer loop uses the same outcomes to estimate policy-relative interaction utility and adapt experience. To obtain estimates from sparse, stochastic rollouts, the framework holds the scenario and interaction state constant within each group and prioritizes conditions whose group pass rates lie near the policy's competence boundary. A hierarchical controller shares evidence across support intents, while uncertainty-guided exploration and uniform rehearsal prevent premature exclusion. The resulting distribution generates trajectories, closing both loops without increasing the rollout budget. On SAGE, our framework raises Qwen3-8B Overall from 53.87 to 79.24 and outperforms protocol-matched uniform emotion-reward reinforcement learning by 7.23 points.

This paper presents EmpaAva, to our knowledge the first open-source, agentic 3D-avatar empathetic chatbot, which carries empathetic response generation (ERG) from text-only exchanges into live, face-to-face interaction. Through a video-call-like interface, a user speaks to a 3D digital human that reads their affect from speech and optional vision, and replies with emotional speech, lip-synced facial motion, and photorealistic 3D Gaussian rendering. At its core, an LLM coordinates a Tri-Agent Architecture, in which perception, empathetic response planning, and embodied rendering form a closed loop, paired with a Response Planning layer that compiles each reply into an executable multimodal plan, keeping voice, expression, and rendering on one empathetic intent. Building on strong open-source modules, EmpaAva supplies the intelligence that binds them into one controllable, inspectable experience. In automatic and human evaluations, EmpaAva surpasses text-only, 2D talking-face, and multimodal avatar baselines in emotion understanding, response quality, and audio-visual consistency. We open-source EmpaAva with an online live demo.

LLM companions are deployed at scale in personally consequential settings, yet poorly evaluated. Existing benchmarks use hand-authored scenarios and prompted simulators, aggregate empathy into one score, and overlook judge biases such as same-family favoritism and scale drift. We introduce CompanionBench, an interactive bilingual benchmark. To our knowledge, it is the first companion benchmark to ground both its scenarios and a trained user simulator in de-identified real-world data. A hidden disclosure gate branches each persona's trajectory on the agent's own behavior, controlling the interaction state space without scripting dialogue. We operationalize ten capabilities derived from 25 theories across psychology and counseling, four of them not graded explicitly by prior work: holding ambiguity, selfobject responsiveness, positive resonance and calibrated challenge. Agents are assessed on two complementary axes: a subjective ten-capability rubric and a deterministic measure of whether deeper disclosure was earned. A cross-family panel dilutes same-family favoritism; an Item Response Theory model separates agent quality from judge severity. Theory fixes what to measure and how personas are structured; real data supply events, history, and profiles -- coverage from theory, authenticity from data. Rankings are reproducible in both languages (rho = 0.996 ZH / 0.953 EN). Evaluating 28 agents reveals capability-level differences obscured by aggregate scores. Emotion regulation and calibrated challenge remain common weaknesses; holding ambiguity discriminates most. Role-play agents rank near the bottom: immersion does not imply relational competence. Across agents, the dominant failure mode is substituting surface warmth for substantive relational support. We will release 500 Chinese-English parallel pairs and the evaluation code.

We present JoyAI-Talker, a full-duplex speech dialogue system that delivers robust foundation model capabilities while empowering empathetic interaction and voice agent intelligence. JoyAI-Talker adopts a modular Thinker-Talker architecture and further implements a unified speech-text joint training pipeline to mitigate the common "cognitive degradation" bottleneck, thereby largely preserving the model's core textual reasoning, STEM, and logical capabilities while extending them to speech-based interaction. For expressive speech synthesis, the Talker module employs a text-controllable generation paradigm that enables natural-language instructions to flexibly control vocal attributes and localized paralinguistic events, such as laughter and sighs, supporting more expressive and fine-grained speech responses. To enhance conversational empathy, we introduce the Persona-Adaptive Empathetic Response (PAER) framework. PAER employs a hierarchical cognitive pipeline to extract non-verbal speaker cues, such as gender, age, and emotional state, from raw input audio, incorporate them into the Thinker's CoT reasoning, and generate context-adaptive responses that align semantically appropriate text with fine-grained control over utterance-level expressiveness and localized paralinguistic events, including sighs, speaking rate, and volume. We further integrate Joy-Duplex, a state-driven, plug-and-play full-duplex framework that functions as an efficient gating engine for real-time turn control. Extensive evaluations show that JoyAI-Talker achieves highly competitive performance on foundational T2T and S2T benchmarks. In full-duplex evaluation, the system reaches a high response rate of 0.88 under user interruptions while maintaining an extremely low false-trigger rate under background speech, demonstrating its readiness for fluid and natural speech dialogue.

Conversational Speech Synthesis is a fundamental component of human-computer interaction, aiming to generate contextually appropriate, expressive, and empathetic speech. However, facial expressions encode subtle and rich affective cues that are crucial for empathetic speech interaction, whereas existing approaches often overlook this important modality. In addition, the lack of large-scale natural conversational datasets with both speech and visual modalities also limits the development of visual affect understanding in conversational settings.To address these limitations, we propose FacialTalker, a facial-expression-aware CSS framework built upon a large language model backbone. To efficiently encode facial expressions, we propose AUTokenizer, a single-codebook visual tokenizer that discretizes each frame-level facial expression into a compact token, trained with supervision from combinations of facial Action Units. We further introduce a dual direct preference optimization (DualDPO) strategy, which extends the DPO by jointly imposing preference constraints on both visual and speech token sequences, to enhance the model's understanding of facial expressions and speech semantics in multimodal conversational contexts. Moreover, we construct VSDD-1K, a large-scale multimodal dialogue dataset collected through a fully automated pipeline from real-world Internet conversations, comprising over 1,033 hours of synchronized speaker videos and speech, with more than 85% of frames containing valid faces. Extensive objective and subjective experiments demonstrate that FacialTalker consistently outperforms strong baselines in facial-expression perception and speech synthesis quality, generating speech that is more natural, expressive, and better aligned with the conversational context. The results also validate the effectiveness of our training strategy and dataset construction pipeline.

Using large language models (LLMs) to assist psychological counseling is an important task in the field of natural language processing. The construction of high-quality psychological support dialogue corpora serves as a critical foundation for training counseling-oriented conversational models. However, existing data generation approaches generally suffer from several limitations, including emotionally stable seekers, limited variation in emotional dynamics, and a high degree of compliance with counselors' guidance. These issues result in LLM that lack the capability to effectively respond to emotionally unstable scenarios. In addition, counselor responses are typically driven by problem-solving objectives, thereby overlooking the role of emotion-focused interaction, which are essential in psychological counseling. To address these gaps, we propose EmoTrace, a multi-turn dialogue corpus generation framework centered on modeling seekers' emotional trajectories. we construct seekers' cognitive profile and introduce a seeker module with emotional schemas and an associated activation mechanism, a counselor module, and an emotional trajectory control module, thereby enhancing the layering of the seeker's emotional expression and the counselor's targeted empathic expression. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed method outperforms existing approaches in terms of emotional richness and empathy quality.

Despite recent advances in large language models (LLMs), their ability to generate empathetic mental health counseling responses in low-resource languages remains largely unexplored. To address this gap, we curate 625 authentic mental health cases from three complementary sources: (1) publicly available Facebook posts discussing mental health concerns, (2) transcripts from the Bangladeshi television program "Ami Akhon Ki Korbo", and (3) anonymized student questionnaire responses covering diverse emotional and psychological challenges. Based on these cases, we build an evaluation corpus comprising advice written by licensed clinical psychologists and responses generated by three modern proprietary LLMs: GPT-4o Mini, Claude 4.5 Haiku, and Gemini 2.5 Pro. We further propose the Role-Playing Reflective Chain-of-Thought Advisory Framework (RP-RCAF), a task-specific prompting strategy that combines expert-authored few-shot examples with structured self-reflection to produce supportive, culturally aware, and ethically aligned counseling through a compassionate advisor persona. We also introduce the Grok 4-Based Response Evaluation and Scoring Framework (G-REFS), which integrates automated assessment with expert psychologist validation across emotional sensitivity, cultural appropriateness, linguistic clarity, and ethical soundness. Experimental results show that RP-RCAF consistently outperforms conventional prompting across all evaluated models and produces responses that more closely align with professional psychological counseling.

Empathetic Response Generation (ERG) requires models to recognize users' emotions and generate empathetic responses. Commonsense knowledge has been shown to support such reasoning, yet existing approaches typically reuse fixed commonsense representations across understanding and generation, limiting their ability to coordinate such knowledge across different stages. We propose DCC, a Dynamic Commonsense Coordination Framework with three complementary modules: residual-based commonsense interaction (SCE-AttnRes) to integrate contextual and situational commonsense representations, Association-Guided Commonsense Filtering (AGCF) to down-weight low-relevance commonsense relations, and Iterative Commonsense-Aware Decoding (ICAD) to dynamically retrieve commonsense memories during generation. Experiments on the Empathetic-Dialogues benchmark show that DCC improves emotion classification accuracy and response diversity over the CEM baseline while maintaining comparable perplexity. An LLM-based blind evaluation further demonstrates that DCC generates responses with better relevance, coherence, and informativeness. The code and implementation details will be publicly available at https://github.com/Hanabi-Q/DCC-ERG.

Building socially calibrated large language models, which can learn from others without simply yielding to them, requires more than reducing sycophancy as a one-dimensional failure mode. Models must distinguish when to incorporate others' perspectives from when to maintain a well-grounded moral judgment. We study the broader resistance-compliance process governing this distinction. Across three studies, we show that models' judgment revision is structured along three dimensions that parallel classic phenomena in human social psychology: the distance between an incoming view and the model's initial position, the source attribution of that view, and the coalition structure supporting it. Models are generally more receptive to nearby positions, more influenced by views presented as their own prior judgments, and differently responsive to group pressure. These findings recast sycophancy as one expression of a broader judgment-updating process shaped by social influence. Our framework provides a principled basis for distinguishing constructive belief revision from sycophantic compliance, thereby supporting better alignment in morally consequential interactions.

Backchannels, which signal listener states like empathy and understanding, are fundamental to natural human interaction. However, current approaches rely solely on audio and text. This omits crucial visual cues, such as facial expressions and gestures, as well as broader conversational contexts, which are necessary for accurate prediction. In this paper, we introduce Context-Aware Multimodal Alignment for Backchannel Prediction (CAMA-BC), a novel framework that leverages visual information through Multi-Layer Multimodal Alignment (MMA). Our alignment process comprises two stages. First, Context Alignment (MMA-CA) utilizes unlabeled dialogues with videos to capture conversational contexts. Next, Backchannel Alignment (MMA-BA) fine-tunes the representations specifically for backchannel prediction. Experimental results show that CAMA-BC significantly outperforms both existing methods and simple multimodal baselines, with particular effectiveness in recognizing complex backchannels such as empathy.

Contemplative traditions have long guided ethical behavior and prosocial interaction, and recent work suggests that contemplative principles (e.g., mindfulness, compassion, non-dual reasoning) may offer a promising paradigm for aligning large language models (LLMs), improving cooperation and reducing ethical violations in LLM outputs. However, as new models, evaluation metrics, and benchmarks emerge rapidly, it remains challenging to systematically assess whether and how contemplative principles enhance LLM alignment across diverse and evolving scenarios, and existing approaches are often ad hoc and fail to generalize. We present a modular, extensible evaluation framework, initially targeted at the mental health domain, that enables seamless integration of new models, metrics, and benchmarks through a reusable pipeline. The framework currently reproduces existing state-of-the-art results and supports systematic cross-evaluation by flexibly mixing and matching models, metrics, and benchmarks, enabling fair comparison and deeper insight. Its plug-and-play prompting module offers a principled pathway for incorporating ethical perspectives such as contemplative principles, allowing domain experts to define alignment criteria without requiring technical expertise. Although initially focused on mental health, the framework is domain-agnostic and extends naturally to areas such as decision-making, moral reasoning, and human-AI collaboration. By bridging computational evaluation with human-centered ethical reasoning, this work lays the groundwork for interdisciplinary research spanning cognitive science, behavioral economics, philosophy, and system design, toward robust, trustworthy, and socially beneficial human-AI ecosystems.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have substantially advanced persona-based dialogue agents for emotion-sensitive role simulation in healthcare, education, counseling, customer service, and interactive storytelling. However, two related lines of work leave a key gap. Persona-based dialogue systems often encode emotions as static traits or surface-level stylistic cues, and affective dialogue research has largely focused on empathetic response generation toward users rather than modeling the agent persona's own evolving emotional state. As a result, trigger-driven emotional evolution within a character remains underexplored. To address this limitation, we draw inspiration from the Component Process Model (CPM), a psychological theory that views emotion as a dynamic process shaped by the appraisal of external events. We propose CPM-MultiAgent, a CPM-grounded emotion evolution multi-agent framework for supporting emotional changes in persona-based dialogue. Instead of treating a character's emotion as a fixed attribute, CPM-MultiAgent represents it as a latent state that is continuously reshaped by dialogue triggers. Through affective trigger extraction, CPM-based collaborative appraisal, and emotion state updating, the framework enables more emotionally consistent role simulation in multi-turn interactions.Experiments with baseline comparisons, ablation studies, human evaluation, and case analyses demonstrate that CPM-MultiAgent effectively models dynamic emotional evolution in emotionally sensitive role-simulation settings.

Large Language Models are increasingly deployed in emotional-support contexts and crisis-related situations. Nevertheless, their cross-lingual abilities in these circumstances remain underexplored. Existing benchmarks emphasize multilingual performance but rarely examine crisis-related empathy and cultural grounding in low-to-mid-resource languages. We introduce SPLIT, a 500-prompt benchmark designed to evaluate LLM consistency in generating emotionally grounded responses across five categories: Stress, Panic, Loneliness, Internal Displacement, and Tension. We evaluate three technically diverse LLMs across three dimensions: Empathetic Accuracy, Linguistic Naturalness, and Contextual & Cultural Grounding. The framework aims to assess and compare the quality of LLM responses in both English and Ukrainian languages, as well as to explore the reliability of the LLM-as-a-jury paradigm. Our findings reveal that Gemini-2.5-Flash and LLaMA-3.3-70B-Instruct degrade when transitioning to Ukrainian, while DeepSeek-V3 remains comparatively stable within our benchmark. We additionally find that human and AI evaluators agree weakly on empathy and naturalness but diverge on cultural grounding. We further argue that producing Ukrainian text is not equivalent to producing Ukrainian emotional support. Our findings may assist in the future development of more culturally tailored benchmark designs, as well as encourage a stronger emphasis on human-centered evaluation.

Safety benchmarks often buy scalability by fixing the prompt, the language, and the turn structure. For emotional-support chatbots, that bargain hides precisely where safety failures emerge: across a multilingual, multi-turn crisis conversation. We present EMPATH, a benchmark for safety evaluation of emotional-support chatbots. An auditor model role-plays help-seeking users, generating multi-turn conversations from 140 seed instructions and 34 personas. A judge model scores each full transcript against 19 metrics across five dimensions: crisis handling, therapeutic quality, conversational integrity, emotional safety, and cultural adaptation. EMPATH is built for Mexican Spanish and US English; the studies reported here run in Mexican Spanish. Auditor and judge are drawn from different model families, and the judge is treated as an instrument to be calibrated rather than trusted. A strict per-criterion rubric reveals material score inflation on 10 of the 19 metrics and restores discrimination. We study the measurement properties of the benchmark through judge calibration and cross-family inter-judge agreement. We also illustrate EMPATH on three frontier models, one of them open-weight. Aggregate scores sit within 0.74 points of one another, but per-metric profiles diverge by up to six points in model-specific places. Under the standard rubric, both the ranking and the weak spots are stable across a second, cross-family judge: 93% of scores fall within plus or minus 1. A five-run test-retest adds a second axis: even the steadiest model swings from 2 to 10 on a crisis metric across identical re-runs, and deepseek-v4-pro returns a different conversation on every run even at temperature 0. Run-to-run reliability is therefore a per-model safety property, not noise to average away. EMPATH is system-agnostic; the pipeline, seeds, personas, and rubrics are released for reuse.

Self-stigma predicts treatment avoidance and disengagement among people who use drugs (PWUD), yet conversational systems aiming to provide support typically treat self-stigma expression as a uniform signal. We present a three-phase, proof-of-concept study of a persona-aware approach to LLM support. Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) on indicator-level features from 1,174 self-stigma expressors on Reddit yields a four-persona typology validated against held-out behavioral and linguistic features. Sequential Bayesian and recurrent neural classifiers recover these personas from limited posting histories, substantially outperforming batch and few-shot LLM baselines (macro-F1 = 0.74 at 30 posts). Evaluation by eight clinical experts across three contemporary LLMs revealed a misalignment: persona-matched responses successfully achieved targeted behavioral shifts, yet raters holistically preferred the generic empathy of the persona-neutral baseline. Our findings suggest that holistic empathy judgments and clinically-aligned response design can pull in opposite directions, and that evaluating LLM-based stigma support requires rubrics capable of decomposing the two.

Large language models have demonstrated significant capabilities in generating diverse and context-aware responses for empathetic dialogue. However, their computational demands severely limit their deployment in resource-constrained environments. While knowledge distillation offers a promising compression solution, it often fails to transfer the nuanced understanding essential for empathy, as it overlooks the implicit contextual cues that guide human connection. To bridge this gap, we propose a \textbf{pr}ivileged \textbf{i}nformation-enhanced knowledge \textbf{d}istillation method for \textbf{e}mpathetic dialogue generation (PRIDE). Our method leverages privileged information, such as expert psychological annotations or future event summaries, which is available exclusively during training but unavailable at inference time. This allows us to transfer the teacher model's empathetic reasoning to smaller models without relying on extra inputs during deployment. Specifically, PRIDE has three key components: (1) An empathy-reasoning prompt that guides the teacher to explicitly decompose the empathetic process into understanding feelings and analyzing situations step-by-step; (2) A multi-source attention mechanism that directs the student to effectively integrate privileged information; (3) A dual-alignment loss that combines reversed Kullback-Leibler divergence and maximum mean discrepancy to ensure robust knowledge transfer at both logit and feature levels. Experiments on multi-modal and text-only datasets demonstrate that our method achieves competitive performance, and in some cases matches or even surpasses larger teacher models in terms of accuracy and semantic relevance.

Empathetic spoken dialogue systems require not only semantically appropriate responses but also emotionally aligned prosodic expression. However, cascade pipelines often discard acoustic cues during speech-to-text conversion, while end-to-end speech models lack interpretable control over emotion and knowledge integration. To address these challenges, we propose PRISM, a multi-agent framework for empathetic spoken dialogue that decouples speech perception, response generation, and speech synthesis into coordinated components. PRISM introduces a prosody-to-language translation mechanism to stabilize large language model reasoning and enables on-demand invocation of external knowledge tools for empathetic dialogue generation. Experimental results demonstrate that PRISM achieves consistent improvements in empathy, prosodic appropriateness, and text response generation quality across objective and subjective metrics. Our code is available at: https://github.com/Bxzfrm/PRISM.

Speech carries more information than just words: a child's voice, a fearful tone, or a noisy background should all lead a sufficiently competent spoken-dialogue assistant to different replies. Current Speech Language Models (SLMs) can recognize such paralinguistic cues but often ignore them in open-ended dialogue. We observe that a simple paralinguistic instruction scaffold at the inference stage narrows this perception-behavior gap, suggesting that the relevant cues are already latent in the model. Such scaffolds, however, remain brittle under multi-turn context and competing instructions. Therefore, we propose \textbf{ParaBridge}, an on-policy self-distillation method that turns a brittle inference-time scaffold into stable model behavior. During training, the scaffold serves only as a temporary privileged view; the scaffold-free model rolls out its own response, while the scaffolded view supplies dense, full-vocabulary next-token targets along its trajectory. This supervision teaches when non-lexical cues should affect the reply without the need for curated dialogues, human labels, or external reward models. On Qwen3-Omni-thinking, ParaBridge raises scaffold-free VoxSafeBench SAR from $14.6\%$ to $40.3\%$ and improves EchoMind average rating from $3.27$ to $3.92$. It also preserves general ability, with MMAU-Pro, VoiceBench, and GPQA all within $0.4$ points of the original model. Beyond the training distribution, ParaBridge generalizes to unseen paralinguistic cues, transfers from safety-oriented training to empathy-oriented dialogue, and works on a different SLM backbone.

Simulating patients with large language models (LLMs) is a promising tool for mental health training, but existing approaches fail to capture a key clinical reality: self-stigma. Patients experiencing self-stigma, the internalization of negative stereotypes, often exhibit context-sensitive resistance, such as avoidance, denial, or self-blame, which current models render as static or uniformly compliant behavior. To address this, we introduce a novel simulation framework grounded in the psychological 3A1H model of self-stigmatization. Our core innovation is the creation of a \textbf{Stigmatized Self-Reflection} (\textbf{SSR}) dataset, where we augment mental health dialogues with internal monologues that reflect stigma-aware reasoning. By fine-tuning LLMs with this data using a chain-of-thought approach, we train patient agents to dynamically adjust their level and expression of stigma based on conversational triggers. Evaluations demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms specialized baselines, generating more authentic and situationally appropriate patient responses. This work provides a crucial step towards realistic stigma simulation for clinical training and empathetic dialogue systems.

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly mediate high-stakes interactions in finance, medicine, and mental-health support, yet users have limited control over how these systems communicate. We frame interaction style as a governance object: provider-side alignment not only blocks harmful content, but also stabilizes communicative defaults that shape users' epistemic distance, relational expectations, and capacity to opt out of emotionalized or anthropomorphic interaction. We introduce a deterministic multi-agent evaluation pipeline for measuring prompt steerability and style drift in long-horizon dialogue. The study replays 100 frozen user-only scripts across four domains and three runnable persona conditions: default, sarcastic, and cold, using three generator models, yielding 90,000 assistant replies scored by a human-calibrated LLM judge on harmfulness, negative emotion, inappropriateness, empathic language, anthropomorphism, and refusal behavior. A fourth harmful persona is evaluated separately as a safety-gating test. The paper contributes a reproducible method for quantifying whether prompt-specified styles remain stable over time and a governance framework distinguishing safety gating, civility steering, and affective default lock-in. Overall, we show that prompt steerability and regression-to-default are observable indicators of provider control over communicative form, with implications for pluralism, autonomy, and democratic agency in human-LLM interaction.

Current AI models frequently exhibit epistemic sycophancy, endorsing claims to agree with a user. Existing evaluations typically measure this either by assessing what it takes to make a model shift a binary endorsement or by eliciting an explicit probability in a proposition. However, much user-facing sycophantic behavior is demonstrated through shifts in graded support expressed through ordinary language. We propose the AI Epistemic Deference Index (AEDI): a continuous, unidimensional score representing how sensitive the support expressed in a model's output is to the attitude expressed in a user's prompt. To generate AEDI, we provide a new protocol for estimating probabilities from natural language outputs, using LLMs-as-judges validated for consistency and correlation to human judgment. We deploy it on a new curated database of 500 propositions across diverse topics and 16,000 prompts varying in user attitude, testing eight prominent models. Every model exhibits substantial deference, though with large and systematic differences across providers, with Claude models demonstrating the least, and Grok and Gemini models the most. The effect is amplified in prompts requesting a written artifact, and concentrated on propositions where models hold weaker priors. We release AEDI as an easy-to-update benchmark and measurement pipeline for output-level sycophancy evaluation.

While Audio Language Models (ALMs) demonstrate strong semantic understanding, they struggle with complex affective interactions. Specifically, textual semantic dominance often overshadows acoustic nuances, and a lack of cognitive depth leads to generic, emotion-agnostic responses. We propose CogAudio-LLM\footnote{ \urlstyle{same} https://github.com/zxzhao0/CogAudio-LLM, a novel cognitive affective reasoning framework. To mitigate semantic dominance, we build LIME-440K, a ``lexically-identical, multi-emotion'' dataset designed to facilitate acoustic-semantic decoupling. We introduce EIPS, a 4-step Chain-of-Thought (CoT) mechanism incorporating psychological reasoning. For inference efficiency, multi-stage training explicitly establishes EIPS via supervised fine-tuning, then distills this logic into an implicit generation process. Finally, we design DR-SAPO (Dual-Route Soft Adaptive Policy Optimization) to dynamically balance the logical rigor of the CoT with the empathetic quality of the direct response.

Lifelong digital companions must integrate cross-session cues, continually update their understanding of users, and adapt to shifting privacy boundaries. Existing evaluations fail to capture this, testing memory recall and short-term empathy in isolation. To bridge this gap, we introduce \benchmark, a benchmark centered on multi-session \textit{Memory-Emotion-Environment} loops. By modeling users as persistent worlds with layered profiles and event trajectories, \benchmark uses multi-agent simulation to project environmental dynamics into dialogue, preserving the critical gap between latent thoughts and observable expressions. Evaluating 2,000 personas and 111K tasks across memory tracking, user understanding, privacy control, and emotional companionship, our experiment results reveal a stark reality: even models that saturate current memory benchmarks fail to sustain accurate user understanding and true companionship over long horizons.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in long-term interactions with users, empathy has become an increasingly important capability. However, existing research overlooks the influence of users' personality traits on empathetic strategies during long-term interactions. To address this gap, we introduce the task of personalized empathy, which focuses on adapting empathetic strategies according to users' personalized characteristics derived from history. To study and enhance this capability, we construct PersonaEmp, a personalized empathy dataset built from long-term user-AI interactions, featuring rich user histories, persona information, and empathy-seeking queries. We further propose PereGRM, a reward modeling framework that combines the empathy evaluation structure with dynamic evaluation criteria generation for fine-grained reward modeling. Experimental results across different settings and multiple judge models show that PereGRM consistently achieves the strongest performance improvements, indicating its effectiveness for enhancing personalized empathetic capabilities.

The appropriateness of empathy in AI has emerged as a critical concern, as excessive empathy risks seeming manipulative while insufficient empathy appears dismissive. While prior research has explored how to quantify empathy in AI, few studies examine whether such empathy is contextually appropriate. This paper introduces an economic perspective by applying signaling theory to human-AI conversations. We propose Signal Cost Proxies (emotional richness, perspective-taking, and contextual tailoring) mapped to affective, cognitive, and associative empathy. This multidimensional framework enables systematic evaluation of empathy not just by presence, but by its appropriateness relative to user demand.

Memory-augmented language agents are increasingly deployed in affective applications such as emotional support, where understanding and responding to users' latent emotional needs is critical. However, existing research often treats memory as a tool for factual retrieval, overlooking its role in shaping users' emotional experiences. In this work, we introduce ENPMR-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating Emotional Need-aware Proactive Memory Retrieval (ENPMR), a core capability that enables agents to infer users' latent emotional needs and proactively retrieve appropriate memories to support empathetic interaction. Grounded in Maslow's hierarchy of needs, ENPMR-Bench includes over 1,800 memory-augmented dialogues and defines structured mappings between emotional needs and supportive memory types. Experimental results demonstrate that current retrieval paradigms, including both embedding-based and LLM-driven approaches, exhibit substantial deficiencies, with empathy scores significantly lagging behind golden memory conditions. While chain-of-thought prompting improves the alignment between inferred emotional needs and retrieved memories to some extent, a notable performance gap remains. Together, these findings reveal critical limitations in current agents and outline directions for advancing personalized emotional support through need-sensitive memory retrieval.

Evaluating generative AI (GenAI) systems is challenging because many targets of evaluation are broad, contested concepts, such as "reasoning," "fairness," or "creativity." When these concepts are left underspecified, it becomes unclear what should be measured or how evaluation results should be interpreted. This problem reflects a missing step: systematization, that is, moving from a broad background concept to an explicit, structured account of the concept in measurable terms. To help address the fact that systematization is cognitively demanding and resource-intensive, we investigate whether AI assistance can support this process. To enable AI-assisted systematization and assess its quality, we introduce a structured representation of a systematized concept, a concept spec, and a validation worksheet. We then develop two AI-assisted systematizers: a direct, zero-shot approach and a multi-agent approach that more closely mirrors manual systematization approaches from existing literature. We use these systematizers to produce concept specs for two concepts -- hate-based rhetoric and digital empathy -- and evaluate resulting concept specs on content validity and information recoverability.

An agent must act on the situation before it, learn what it cannot yet represent, and model other agents well enough to coordinate. These faculties are usually realized by separate mechanisms, yet they share a failure mode: the situation can exceed what the agent can currently represent, and the honest response is then a principled refusal that says what was missing. We develop a small cognitive architecture in which these limits arise from a single quantity. An Interpretation-Decision Unit (IDU) interprets a content vector through a family of regimes - local representational frames with private bases - and decides which actions it licenses; a scalar residual of the content against the active regimes' representational scope drives the unit. Low residual with a clean licensing emits an action; otherwise the unit re-interprets, attempts a description-length-justified expansion, or halts with a typed, witnessed terminal. We prove the unit is total and deterministic: for any content and fixed configuration it halts in finitely many bounded-cost steps with a unique terminal witness, so abstention carries its cause by construction. By binding the architecture's open parameters without changing its mechanics, the same residual-against-scope constraint recovers three documented phenomena at three scopes: the typology of not-knowing (typed abstention); a forced misunderstanding between agents, localized to one shared concept and invisible to the agent committing it (bounded empathy); and prerequisite dependence in learning derived from a bounded focus window rather than posited (developmental prerequisites). Each instantiation is worked for a natural and an artificial agent and states a falsifiable prediction, so one constraint can model limits in both human and machine cognition. The account contributes a unification and a notion of accountable abstention, typed and witnessed by construction.

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into emotionally sensitive domains, the structural integrity of their emotional intelligence (EI) becomes a critical frontier for safety and alignment. Current benchmarks often conflate superficial politeness with deep affective reasoning, failing to distinguish between perceptual accuracy and interactive efficacy. Here, we introduce FACET (Functional Affective Competence and Empathy Test), a psychometrically grounded framework comprising 480 expert-crafted items. Unlike previous metrics, FACET is theoretically anchored in the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso four-branch ability model, operationalizing EI through perception, facilitation, understanding, and management of emotions. Through an evaluation of nine frontier models (including GPT-5, Claude-Sonnet-4), we demonstrate that emotional intelligence is not a monolithic capability but is fragmented across cognitive and interactive dimensions. While frontier models demonstrate robust proficiency in objective emotion recognition and social reasoning, this does not consistently translate to interactive success. We categorize these discrepancies into three distinct performance profiles: cognitive-dominant, interactive-dominant, and context-dependent. These typologies indicate that emotional skills do not scale uniformly with general intelligence or model size; rather, they are shaped by specific alignment paradigms. Notably, we identify hidden emotion recognition as a universal performance bottleneck across all architectures. Our results suggest that current RLHF processes may optimize for "stochastic empathy", a statistical mimicry of emotional syntax, at the expense of integrated affective reasoning. These findings challenge the assumption of linear emotional scaling and provide a rigorous roadmap for developing socially aware agents capable of genuine clinical resonance.

According to canonical negotiation theory, people's success in a negotiation depends on how well they balance competing demands--empathizing and asserting, demonstrating concern for other and concern for self, being soft on the people and hard on the problem. Yet people struggle to manage these tensions, so researchers have lacked the ability to rigorously test the field's prescriptions under controlled conditions. AI agents do not face the same limitations, and their precision, repertoire, consistency, and scalability enable a new class of experiments to contribute to negotiation theory. In this article, we introduce personality engineering: a methodology that uses AI agents to precisely parameterize, manipulate, and evaluate negotiator personality. We propose using the interpersonal circumplex--and its two core dimensions of warmth and dominance--as a foundational coordinate system for the field. This approach offers both a rigorous methodology for testing classic negotiation theories and a practical guide for designing the personalities of AI negotiation agents.

We use sparse autoencoder (SAE) feature steering to amplify Dark Triad personality traits (Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy) in Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct and evaluate the resulting behavioral changes across five psychological instruments. The steered model becomes substantially more exploitative, aggressive, and callous on novel behavioral scenarios (d=10.62) while its cognitive empathy remains intact, reproducing the empathy dissociation characteristic of human Dark Triad populations. Critically, strategic deception is completely unaffected across all features, suggesting that exploitation and deception may operate through dissociable computational pathways in large language models. Individual feature analysis reveals non-redundant encoding, with each feature driving distinct antisocial mechanisms through separable computational pathways. We also show that feature discovery method itself modulates intervention depth: contrastively-discovered features change both self-report and behavior, while semantically-searched features change only self-report (d=12.65 between methods on behavior). These findings suggest that antisocial tendencies in at least one large language model comprise dissociable components rather than a unified construct, with implications for how such tendencies should be detected, measured, and controlled.

In the context of today's high-pressure, aging society, the demand for large-scale emotional models capable of providing empathetic support is more critical than ever. However, existing benchmarks fail to simultaneously achieve ecological validity, signal clarity, and reliable fine-grained labeling. We introduce EmoS, a high-fidelity bilingual benchmark designed to resolve the limitations of ecological validity and noise in existing datasets by combining strictly filtered static slices with a dynamic Streaming Monologue subset. Supported by a rigorous dual-layer human annotation pipeline, EmoS provides trusted ground truth that captures continuous emotional evolution. Empirical results show that fine-tuning MLLMs (multimodal large language models) on EmoS yields significant gains over zero-shot baselines, laying the foundation for the training and evaluation of future emotion recognition models and empathy models. The dataset and code are publicly available at https://github.com/NLP2CT/EmoS.

Reinforcement learning from verifiable emotion rewards RLVER has produced language models with strong empathetic performance, evaluated on benchmarks that assume cooperative, honest users. Yet real emotional interactions systematically violate this assumption: users gaslight, escalate, and pressure AI systems for unconditional validation, dynamics that cooperative benchmarks cannot surface. We construct the Adversarial Empathy Benchmark AEB and introduce the Emotional Consistency Score ECS to evaluate empathetic robustness under adversarial conditions. AEB comprises six psychologically grounded adversarial trajectory types with discriminative reward structures that penalize formulaic responses; ECS formally disentangles a model's capacity to track user emotional states from its capacity to improve them. In a controlled experiment across eight scenario-matched conditions (think and no-think conditions on 2 RLVER models, and 2 base models (Qwen 1.5B and 7B) with 480 adversarial dialogues), RLVER-PPO-Think substantially outperforms the same-scale untuned baseline (0.963 vs. 0.761, $p<0.001, r=0.688$), with zero dialogue collapses and 47% higher hidden-intention detection. However, ECS remains nearly flat and is not significantly different for RLVER-PPO-Think versus Base-7B-Think ($p=0.650$): RL training improves emotional responsiveness without measurable gains in observable state tracking. We interpret the ECS--FS (Final Score) gap as a behavioral/legibility dissociation inside this simulator family, not as evidence about internal understanding or clinical readiness.

This position paper argues that sycophancy in LLMs is a boundary failure between social alignment and epistemic integrity. Existing work often operationalizes sycophancy through external behavior such as agreement with incorrect user beliefs, position reversals, or deviation from an objective standard of correctness. These formulations capture only overt forms of the phenomenon and leave subtler boundary failures involving epistemic integrity and social alignment underspecified. We argue that sycophancy should not be understood as agreement alone, but as alignment behavior that displaces independent epistemic judgment. To clarify this boundary, we propose a three-condition framework for sycophancy. First, the user expresses a cue in the form of a belief, preference, or self-concept. Second, the model shifts toward that cue through alignment behavior. Third, this shift compromises epistemic accuracy, independent reasoning, or appropriate correction. We also introduce a taxonomy for classifying sycophancy, consisting of alignment targets, mechanisms, and severity. The paper concludes by discussing implications for alignment evaluation and argues for boundary-aware assessment, structured rubrics, and mitigation strategies, while situating these proposals alongside alternative views of sycophancy.

Ethical deliberation is often misunderstood as a search for single right or wrong answers, creating difficulties for non-ethically trained personnel who must address ethically laden challenges. We developed EeVA, an agentic-like LLM-based workflow designed to support comparative ethical reflection rather than deliver definitive ethical answers. EeVA was programmed in n8n using three interconnected workflows: starter, worker, and emitter. It evaluated uploaded use cases against 10 ethical frameworks through evaluator and synthesis prompts. Proof-of-concept testing used three published cases from urban mobility, peer-to-peer energy trading, and social-service resource allocation. Across all cases, EeVA produced consistently structured framework-specific evaluations and integrated syntheses. Outputs differentiated between frameworks, identified convergences and divergences, recommended modifications to increase alignment, and highlighted persistent ethical tensions. Syntheses were readable for non-specialists and shifted attention away from simplistic answers toward design conditions, safeguards, and areas where full cross-framework agreement was unlikely. The findings suggest that LLMs can be organised into usable workflows that preserve ethical plurality while helping bridge the communicative gap between ethicists and non-ethically trained personnel. EeVA's value lies not in replacing ethicists or resolving moral disagreement, but in scaffolding structured ethical deliberation. EeVA offers a promising proof of concept for supporting ethical reflection where access to ethics expertise is limited. Further work is needed on reproducibility, human evaluation, user testing, and efficiency before it can be considered a mature tool.

Mental-health dialogue models are increasingly evaluated by AI-based evaluators, yet these evaluators often treat surface empathy, supportiveness, or fluency as evidence of safety. In this paper, we study a hidden failure mode that we call implicit sycophancy: a response may appear empathetic while implicitly reinforcing catastrophizing, avoidance, hopeless prediction, or CBT-style labeling. To examine this problem, we introduce a diagnostic benchmark for implicit-sycophancy detection, built from three representative mental-health dialogue sources covering everyday peer support, counseling-style emotional support, and crisis-oriented interaction, and further construct a leakage-audited clean single-response matched benchmark with 500 contexts and 1,500 matched response windows. We then propose Dynamic Emotional Signature Graphs (DESG), a structured offline audit framework that separates LLM-based state extraction from final scoring and evaluates clinical direction through semantic, affective, and cognitive-distortion state transitions rather than free-form LLM judgment. Unlike metadata, surface-style, lexical, embedding, and rubric-LLM baselines, DESG scores the direction of clinical-state change induced by a response; on the leakage-audited clean matched benchmark, DESG-StateRisk improves over the strongest non-DESG baseline by 0.0488 macro-F1 and achieves the best harmful-risk detection result. These results suggest that evaluating implicit sycophancy requires explicit clinical-state modeling together with leakage checks, shortcut controls, and competitive baselines.

Standard post-training pipelines apply supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning (RL) to make language models helpful, but these processes may inadvertently degrade values instilled during pre-training. We investigate whether the domain of post-training data differentially affects the retention of animal compassion values in a Llama 3.1 8B model mid-trained on compassion-oriented synthetic data, using both SFT (helpfulness via Dolly-15k vs. coding via Magicoder-110K) and GRPO (helpfulness via RLHFlow vs. coding via Magicoder), evaluated on the ANIMA 2.2 benchmark and MORU benchmark (Moral Reasoning Under Uncertainty). Helpfulness training significantly degrades animal compassion relative to coding training on ANIMA (SFT: 35.7% vs. 65.2%; GRPO: 18.7% vs. 32.0%), replicating across two independent helpfulness datasets and two training paradigms. On English MORU items, helpfulness training degrades general moral reasoning by 25.5 percentage points (46.4% vs. 71.9%), a striking gap that rivals the compassion effect in magnitude. However, this effect does not transfer cross-lingually: on the multilingual MORU benchmark, the domain effect disappears (SFT: 52.3% vs. 51.2%). In contrast, the animal compassion effect transfers consistently across languages, with Magicoder's ANIMA percentage-point gain over the base model 4.5 times larger on non-English items than English items. This divergence suggests that values instilled through mid-training are encoded more deeply and cross-lingually than reasoning improvements from domain-specific post-training. These results suggest that, for labs building on value-laden mid-training, coding-domain post-training may better preserve mid-trained values than helpfulness post-training without harming general reasoning capabilities.

Patient simulators are gaining traction in mental health training by providing scalable exposure to complex and sensitive patient interactions. Simulating depressed patients is particularly challenging, as safety constraints and high patient variability complicate simulations and underscore the need for simulators that capture diverse and realistic patient behaviors. However, existing evaluations heavily rely on LLM-judges with poorly specified prompts and do not assess behavioral diversity. We introduce PSI-Bench, an automatic evaluation framework that provides interpretable, clinically grounded diagnostics of depression patient simulator behavior across turn-, dialogue-, and population-level dimensions. Using PSI-Bench, we benchmark seven LLMs across two simulator frameworks and find that simulators produce overly long, lexically diverse responses, show reduced variability, resolve emotions too quickly, and follow a uniform negative-to-positive trajectory. We also show that the simulation framework has a larger impact on fidelity than the model scale. Results from a human study demonstrate that our benchmark is strongly aligned with expert judgments. Our work reveals key limitations of current depression patient simulators and provides an interpretable, extensible benchmark to guide future simulator design and evaluation.

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel academically but struggle with social intelligence tasks, such as creating good compromises. In this paper, we present methods for generating empathically neutral compromises between two opposing viewpoints. We first compared four different prompt engineering methods using Claude 3 Opus and a dataset of 2,400 contrasting views on shared places. A subset of the gen erated compromises was evaluated for acceptability in a 50-participant study. We found that the best method for generating compromises between two views used external empathic similarity between a compromise and each viewpoint as iterative feedback, outperforming stan dard Chain of Thought (CoT) reasoning. The results indicate that the use of empathic neutrality improves the acceptability of compromises. The dataset of generated compromises was then used to train two smaller foundation models via margin-based alignment of human preferences, improving efficiency and removing the need for empathy estimation during inference.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in healthcare, yet their communicative alignment with clinical standards remains insufficiently quantified. We conduct a multidimensional evaluation of general-purpose and domain-specialized LLMs across structured medical explanations and real-world physician-patient interactions, analyzing semantic fidelity, readability, and affective resonance. Baseline models amplify affective polarity relative to physicians (Very Negative: 43.14-45.10% vs. 37.25%) and, in larger architectures such as GPT-5 and Claude, produce substantially higher linguistic complexity (FKGL up to 16.91-17.60 vs. 11.47-12.50 in physician-authored responses). Empathy-oriented prompting reduces extreme negativity and lowers grade-level complexity (up to -6.87 FKGL points for GPT-5) but does not significantly increase semantic fidelity. Collaborative rewriting yields the strongest overall alignment. Rephrase configurations achieve the highest semantic similarity to physician answers (up to mean = 0.93) while consistently improving readability and reducing affective extremity. Dual stakeholder evaluation shows that no model surpasses physicians on epistemic criteria, whereas patients consistently prefer rewritten variants for clarity and emotional tone. These findings suggest that LLMs function most effectively as collaborative communication enhancers rather than replacements for clinical expertise.

Multimodal empathetic response generation (MERG) aims to generate emotionally engaging and empathetic responses based on users' multimodal contexts. Existing approaches usually rely on an implicit one-pass generation paradigm from multimodal context to the final response, which overlooks two intrinsic characteristics of MERG: (1) Human perception of emotional cues is inherently structured rather than a direct mapping. The conventional paradigm neglects the hierarchical progression of emotion perception, leading to distorted emotional judgments. (2) Given the inherent complexity and ambiguity of human emotions, the conventional paradigm is prone to significant emotional biases, ultimately resulting in suboptimal empathy. In this paper, we propose a multi-agent framework for MERG, which enhances empathy through structured reasoning and reflective refinement. Specifically, we first introduce a structured empathetic reasoning-to-generation module that explicitly decomposes response generation via multimodal perception, consistency-aware emotion forecasting, pragmatic strategy planning, and strategy-guided response generation, providing a clearer intermediate path from multimodal evidence to response realization. Besides, we develop a global reflection and refinement module, in which a global reflection agent performs step-wise auditing over intermediate states and the generated response, eliminating existing emotional biases and empathy errors, and triggering targeted regeneration. Overall, such a closed-loop framework enables our model to gradually improve the accuracy of emotion perception and eliminate emotion biases during the iteration process. Experiments on several benchmarks, e.g., IEMOCAP and MELD, demonstrate that our model has superior empathic response generation capabilities compared to state-of-the-art methods.

Developing compassionate interactive systems requires agents to not only understand user emotions but also provide diverse, substantive support. While recent works explore empathetic dialogue generation, they remain limited in response form and content, struggling to satisfy diverse needs across users and contexts. To address this, we explore empowering agents with external tools to execute diverse actions. Grounded in the psychological concept of "social support", this paradigm delivers substantive, human-like companionship. Specifically, we first design a dozen user-centric tools simulating various multimedia applications, which can cover different types of social support behaviors in human-agent interaction scenarios. We then construct ComPASS-Bench, the first personalized social support benchmark for LLM-based agents, via multi-step automated synthesis and manual refinement. Based on ComPASS-Bench, we further synthesize tool use records to fine-tune the Qwen3-8B model, yielding a task-specific ComPASS-Qwen. Comprehensive evaluations across two settings reveal that while the evaluated LLMs can generate valid tool-calling requests with high success rates, significant gaps remain in final response quality. Moreover, tool-augmented responses achieve better overall performance than directly producing conversational empathy. Notably, our trained ComPASS-Qwen demonstrates substantial improvements over its base model, achieving comparable performance to several large-scale models. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/hzp3517/ComPASS.

Empathy is essential for fostering natural interactions in spoken dialogue systems, as it enables machines to recognize the emotional tone of human speech and deliver empathetic responses. Recent research has made significant progress in developing empathetic spoken chatbots based on large language models (LLMs). However, several challenges still exist when training such models, including reliance on costly empathetic speech instruction data and a lack of emotional expressiveness in the generated speech. Finetuning LLM with cross-modal empathetic instruction data may also lead to catastrophic forgetting and a degradation of its general capability. To address these challenges, we propose FreezeEmpath, an end-to-end empathetic spoken chatbot trained in a simple and efficient manner. The entire training process relies solely on existing speech instruction data and speech emotion recognition (SER) data, while keeping the LLM's parameters frozen. Experiments demonstrate that FreezeEmpath is able to generate emotionally expressive speech and outperforms other empathetic models in empathetic dialogue, SER, and SpokenQA tasks, demonstrating the effectiveness of our training strategy.

Empathy is central to human connection, yet people often struggle to express it effectively. In blinded evaluations, large language models (LLMs) generate responses that are often judged more empathic than human-written ones. Yet when a response is attributed to AI, recipients feel less heard than when comparable responses are attributed to a human. We built a conversation platform in which participants are asked to offer empathic support to an LLM expressing realistic troubles and conducted a randomized experiment collecting 33,938 messages spanning 2,904 text-based conversations between 968 participants and their LLM conversational partners. We find participants report feeling empathy but systematically fail to express it, but an LLM coaching intervention offering personalized feedback on effective empathic communication significantly boosts it without homogenizing participants' responses. Moreover, we derive a data-driven taxonomy of idiomatic empathic expressions in naturalistic dialogues across personal and workplace trouble scenarios. These results advance the scientific understanding of how empathy is expressed and demonstrate a scalable, AI-based intervention for scaffolding and cultivating it.

Understanding the multi-dimensional attributes and intensity nuances of image-evoked emotions is pivotal for advancing machine empathy and empowering diverse human-computer interaction applications. However, existing models are still limited to coarse-grained emotion perception or deficient reasoning capabilities. To bridge this gap, we introduce EEmoDB, the largest image-evoked emotion understanding dataset to date. It features $5$ analysis dimensions spanning $5$ distinct task categories, facilitating comprehensive interpretation. Specifically, we compile $1.2M$ question-answering (QA) pairs (EEmoDB-QA) from $125K$ images via automated generation, alongside a $36K$ dataset (EEmoDB-Assess) curated from $25K$ images for fine-grained assessment. Furthermore, we propose EEmo-Logic, an all-in-one multimodal large language model (MLLM) developed via instruction fine-tuning and task-customized group relative preference optimization (GRPO) with novel reward design. Extensive experiments demonstrate that EEmo-Logic achieves robust performance in in-domain and cross-domain datasets, excelling in emotion QA and fine-grained assessment. The dataset and code are available at https://github.com/workerred/EEmo-Logic.

Large language models (LLMs) deployed in clinical decision support may acquiesce to patient requests for care that conflicts with evidence-based guidelines. We developed SycoEval-EM, a multi-agent simulation framework to evaluate LLM robustness to adversarial patient persuasion in emergency medicine. Across 19 contemporary LLMs and 1,425 simulated clinical encounters spanning three Choosing Wisely scenarios, acquiescence rates ranged from 0% to 100%, revealing a bimodal distribution. Seven models maintained near-perfect guideline adherence, while six acquiesced in the majority of encounters. Vulnerability varied substantially across clinical scenarios. Acquiescence was highest for CT imaging requests, intermediate for antibiotic prescriptions for sinusitis, and lowest for opioid prescriptions for acute back pain. Model scale, recency, and performance on static medical benchmarks did not consistently predict robustness. All five persuasion tactics produced similar acquiescence rates, with no statistically significant differences after correction for multiple comparisons, suggesting a generalized susceptibility rather than tactic-specific weaknesses. LLM-as-judge evaluation was validated against two independent physician raters across 95 matched conversations and demonstrated near-perfect agreement for the primary outcome of acquiescence (Cohens kappa = 0.957). These findings indicate that static medical benchmarks are insufficient to predict safety performance under sustained social pressure and support incorporating multi-turn adversarial testing into clinical AI evaluation. Notably, two models achieved perfect guideline adherence across all encounters, demonstrating that robustness to patient pressure is attainable without sacrificing effective clinical communication.