Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2505.06120v1

This study focuses on evaluating the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) in multi-turn conversations compared to single-turn interactions. The researchers conducted large-scale simulation experiments using top open- and closed-weight LLMs across six generation tasks. The results showed a significant drop in performance in multi-turn settings, with an average decrease of 39%. Analysis of over 200,000 simulated conversations revealed that the performance degradation was attributed to a minor loss in aptitude and a significant increase in unreliability. It was found that LLMs often make assumptions early on in the conversation and prematurely attempt to generate final solutions, leading to reliance on incorrect information. The study also included tasks such as Data-to-Text and Summary generation, which tested long-context capabilities known to impact model performance. Different metrics were used for evaluation, including binary correctness for certain tasks and continuous scoring for refinement tasks. The sharding process for each task was detailed in the appendix to facilitate reproducibility and future research on LLM evaluation in diverse settings. Previous-generation language models were not designed for multi-turn conversations, leading to a focus on single-turn tasks during evaluation. However, with advancements like ChatGPT sparking interest in multi-turn assessment, efforts have been made to evaluate LLMs' ability in longer conversations through crowd-sourced annotations and expanded evaluation frameworks. This study contributes valuable insights into the challenges faced by LLMs in navigating multi-turn dialogues effectively.

• - Study focused on evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) in multi-turn conversations vs. single-turn interactions
• - Significant drop in performance in multi-turn settings, with an average decrease of 39%
• - Performance degradation attributed to minor loss in aptitude and significant increase in unreliability
• - LLMs tend to make assumptions early on, leading to reliance on incorrect information
• - Tasks included Data-to-Text and Summary generation testing long-context capabilities
• - Different metrics used for evaluation: binary correctness and continuous scoring
• - Sharding process detailed in the appendix for reproducibility and future research
• - Previous-generation models not designed for multi-turn conversations, but interest growing with advancements like ChatGPT
• - Efforts made to evaluate LLMs' ability in longer conversations through crowd-sourced annotations and expanded frameworks

Summary- A study looked at how well big talking computer programs do in long chats compared to short ones. - The big talking computer programs did worse in long chats, with their performance dropping by 39% on average. - This drop was because the programs got a little worse at understanding and became more unreliable. - The big talking computer programs often guessed things too quickly, which made them rely on wrong information. - The study tested the programs' ability to turn data into text and make summaries of long stories. Definitions- Large Language Models (LLMs): Big computer programs that can talk and understand language. - Performance: How well something does a task or job. - Aptitude: Ability or skill in doing something. - Unreliability: Not being able to be trusted or counted on. - Assumptions: Guesses made without all the facts.

Introduction: Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained significant attention in recent years due to their impressive performance on various natural language processing tasks. These models, such as GPT-3 and BERT, have shown remarkable capabilities in generating text that is almost indistinguishable from human-written content. However, most of the evaluation of these models has been focused on single-turn interactions, where the model is given a prompt and generates a response without considering previous context. This research paper aims to evaluate LLMs' performance in multi-turn conversations compared to single-turn interactions. The researchers conducted large-scale simulation experiments using top open- and closed-weight LLMs across six generation tasks. The results showed a significant drop in performance in multi-turn settings, with an average decrease of 39%. This study contributes valuable insights into the challenges faced by LLMs in navigating multi-turn dialogues effectively. Methodology: To evaluate the performance of LLMs in multi-turn conversations, the researchers used six different generation tasks: Data-to-Text, Summary Generation, Question Answering (QA), Dialogue Response Generation (DRG), Machine Translation (MT), and Image Captioning (IC). These tasks were chosen to cover a wide range of natural language understanding abilities required for effective communication. The researchers used both open- and closed-weight LLMs for their experiments. Open-weight models are pre-trained on large amounts of data from diverse sources and fine-tuned for specific tasks. Closed-weight models are trained specifically for a particular task or dataset. By using both types of LLMs, the researchers aimed to understand how pre-training affects model performance in multi-turn conversations. For each task, the researchers simulated over 200,000 conversations between two agents – one representing the user and another representing the model. They also included human-human conversations as a baseline for comparison. Different metrics were used for evaluation depending on the task – binary correctness was used for QA and DRG, while continuous scoring was used for Data-to-Text, Summary Generation, MT, and IC. Results: The results of the experiments showed a significant drop in performance for LLMs in multi-turn conversations compared to single-turn interactions. On average, there was a 39% decrease in performance across all tasks. The researchers also found that open-weight models performed better than closed-weight models in most tasks. Analysis of the simulated conversations revealed that the performance degradation was attributed to two main factors – a minor loss in aptitude and a significant increase in unreliability. The researchers found that LLMs often make assumptions early on in the conversation and prematurely attempt to generate final solutions without considering all context. This leads to reliance on incorrect information and decreases model performance. The study also included tasks such as Data-to-Text and Summary generation, which tested long-context capabilities known to impact model performance. These tasks require understanding previous context and generating coherent responses based on it. The results showed that LLMs struggled with these tasks when faced with longer conversations. Conclusion: This research paper highlights the challenges faced by LLMs when navigating multi-turn conversations effectively. The results show a significant drop in performance compared to single-turn interactions due to a combination of minor loss in aptitude and increased unreliability. The study also sheds light on the importance of evaluating LLMs' abilities beyond single-turn tasks. With advancements like ChatGPT sparking interest in multi-turn assessment, efforts have been made to evaluate LLMs' ability in longer conversations through crowd-sourced annotations and expanded evaluation frameworks. To facilitate reproducibility and future research on LLM evaluation in diverse settings, the paper includes detailed information about the sharding process for each task in its appendix. This will allow other researchers to replicate these experiments or build upon them using different datasets or models. In conclusion, this study provides valuable insights into how LLMs perform in multi-turn conversations and highlights the need for further research in this area. With the increasing use of LLMs in various applications, understanding their capabilities and limitations is crucial for their effective deployment.