Spec-TOD: A Specialized Instruction-Tuned LLM Framework for Efficient Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems

Hoang Pham; Khac-Hoai Nam Bui; Quang-Chieu Nguyen; Quang-Vinh Nguyen

REVIEW 5 major objections 7 minor 1 cited by

Spec-TOD: A Specialized Instruction-Tuned LLM Framework for Efficient Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems

T0 review · 5 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Spec-TOD claims that fine-tuning an 8-billion-parameter LLM with role-decomposed function-calling instructions makes end-to-end task-oriented dialogue work with one-tenth of the usual labeled data.

desk verdict Useful integration of known TOD components, but the central data-efficiency claim is undercut by a missing ablation that would isolate the role-instruction mechanism. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.04841 v1 pith:DB633IRL submitted 2025-07-07 cs.CL

Quang-Vinh Nguyen , Quang-Chieu Nguyen , Hoang Pham , Khac-Hoai Nam Bui This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.CL

keywords task-orienteddialogueinstructiontuningfew-shotlearningfunctioncallingstatetrackingLoRAMultiWOZlow-resourceNLP

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Spec-TOD is an attempt to make end-to-end task-oriented dialogue (TOD) trainable from very little labeled data by turning the pipeline into a set of instruction-specified function calls and fine-tuning a lightweight, open-weight LLM. The paper argues that an 8-billion-parameter model (LLaMA-3-8B) adapted with LoRA can decompose each dialogue into domain selection, dialogue state tracking, policy instruction, and response generation, using six distinct prompt roles so that each task gets its own loss. On MultiWOZ 2.2, it claims that 10% of the training data is enough to reach 77.1% Success and 87.2% Inform, on par with full-shot models like GALAXY, and reports that using 50% or 100% of the data barely changes the result. The reason this matters is that TOD systems currently require extensive annotation; if the claim holds, a strong end-to-end dialogue system can be built from a few hundred annotated dialogues rather than thousands.

What carries the argument

The mechanism that carries the argument is the specified-task instruction template combined with role-masked loss. Each dialogue turn is expanded into the roles System, User, Domain, Function, Observation, and Assistant; the domain role carries the selected domain, the function role carries the JSON function call with belief-state arguments, and the assistant role carries the action and response. The model is trained to predict only the tokens of the role associated with each task, so domain selection, dialogue state tracking, and response generation each receive an isolated gradient signal, and the total loss is the sum of the three task-specific losses.

What would settle it

Fine-tune LLaMA-3-8B on 10% of MultiWOZ 2.2 with plain dialogue-state-to-response text formatting, with no domain/function/observation roles and no per-task instructions, and evaluate with the same metrics; if it matches Spec-TOD's roughly 77% Success and 87% Inform, the specialized instruction and role decomposition is not what causes the result.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that an end-to-end TOD system can be built by reformulating the task as a set of instruction-specified function calls and fine-tuning a compact LLM with per-role losses. Spec-TOD maps each domain to a function, treats belief-state tracking as filling that function's JSON arguments, and generates responses conditioned on a database observation; six roles (system, user, domain, function, observation, assistant) carry the dialogue context, and the loss is the sum of task-specific losses for the domain, function, and assistant roles. On MultiWOZ 2.2, 10% of the training data yields 77.1% Success and 87.2% Inform, matching or exceeding full-shot GALAXY (75.7% Success, 85.4% Inform), with a Combined score of 92.6 versus GALAXY's 100.2. The paper presents this as evidence that strong TOD can be trained from minimal labeled data, and that 50% and 100% data produce nearly identical results.

Load-bearing premise

The paper does not compare against fine-tuning the same 8-billion-parameter model on the same data with a flat, non-role-decomposed text-to-text format, so it assumes the instruction and role decomposition, not the backbone or the function-call format itself, is what delivers the data efficiency.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

On MultiWOZ 2.0 with 10% data, Spec-TOD reaches 75.5% Success and 86.0% Inform, well above the few-shot baselines reported (Mars-G reaches 55.3% and 69.4%).
Even at 1% of MultiWOZ 2.0, the model obtains 63.2% Success and 73.0% Inform, roughly matching the zero-shot AutoTOD-Llama-2-70B (69.8% and 73.3%).
The DST component trained on 10% data outperforms GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 used zero-shot across restaurant, taxi, hotel, attraction, train, and average JGA.
Training beyond 10% saturates: 50% and 100% of MultiWOZ 2.2 give almost identical Success and Inform scores around 83.5/90.5 and 83.4/90.3.
The lower BLEU score is offset by higher GPT-score semantics, suggesting the method trades n-gram overlap for meaning preservation.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

A direct ablation the paper does not run: fine-tune the same LLaMA-3-8B on 10% of MultiWOZ with a flat context-to-belief-state, action, and response format; if that baseline matches Spec-TOD, the six-role instruction decomposition is not the active ingredient, and if it falls short, the decomposition is validated.
The function-call encoding suggests a natural path to schema generalization: because domains are described in the prompt rather than hard-coded, the same recipe could be tested on unseen domains or on other schema-guided dialogue benchmarks, which the paper does not evaluate.
The saturation of performance between 50% and 100% data may indicate that MultiWOZ's schema coverage is nearly complete at 50%; a useful extension would be to measure how performance scales as the number of new slots and domains grows, rather than as dialogue turns grow.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear Colleague,

The headline is that this is a useful applied paper with a real gap in evidence. The authors combine three known ingredients — function-calling DST, role-based instruction prompts, and LoRA fine-tuning of LLaMA-3-8B — into a single end-to-end TOD framework. That specific package is new, and the writing is clear enough that a reader could reproduce the setup. They also release code and prompt templates, which is genuinely helpful.

What’s actually good: The experiments show consistent improvement over few-shot baselines like MinTL, PPTOD, and Mars-G on MultiWOZ 2.0 and 2.2. At 10% training data they report 77.1% Success and 87.2% Inform on 2.2, above the full-shot GALAXY numbers on those two metrics. The backbone comparison (Qwen2 vs Llama3 vs Llama3.1) is a nice robustness check, and the GPT-4o judge evaluation gives a plausible explanation for the low BLEU.

The soft spots are real. The biggest is the missing ablation: every run uses the six-role prompt structure, so you cannot attribute the gains to that structure rather than to the strong backbone and LoRA tuning. A flat text-to-text fine-tune of LLaMA-3-8B on the same data would settle it. Without that, the central claim of the paper — that the framework is what drives data efficiency — is untested. That’s not a fatal flaw; it’s an incomplete experiment.

Second, the “matches full-shot” statement is only true for Success and Inform. On the standard Combined metric, Spec-TOD at 10% gets 92.6 on MultiWOZ 2.2, below GALAXY’s 100.2 and UBAR’s 94.4. The authors should either use Combined as the headline or explicitly say they match on two of the three metrics. Third, the statistical reporting is thin: no error bars, no seeds, and the “p<0.01” in Table 1 is unsupported. Fourth, the 10% subsampling method isn’t described, and the definition of “10% of training data” could affect results.

None of this sinks the paper. The framework is coherent, the code is there, and the data-efficiency direction is practically useful for low-resource dialogue systems. But the claim needs to be restated and tested properly.

For a reader working on TOD or low-resource LLM adaptation, this is worth a look. It deserves a serious referee, and I’d send it to review with the expectation of major revision — add the flat baseline, report variance, specify the subsampling, and tone down the matching claim to Combined or the specific metrics.

Best, [You]

Referee Report

5 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper proposes Spec-TOD, a framework that reformulates end-to-end task-oriented dialogue (TOD) into four specified tasks—domain selection, dialogue state tracking, policy instruction, and response generation—using task-specific instructions, a six-role prompt structure, and role-specific loss masking, then fine-tunes a lightweight LLM (LLaMA-3-8B) with LoRA on only 10% of the MultiWOZ training data. The authors claim that with 10% of the data, Spec-TOD matches full-shot baselines on Success and Inform metrics, outperforms prior few-shot TOD models, and surpasses zero-shot large-LLM prompting, while also presenting ablations over backbones and LoRA hyperparameters and a GPT-4o-based semantic evaluation. Experiments are reported on MultiWOZ 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2.

Significance. If the central claims were fully supported, the paper would make a useful practical contribution: demonstrating that a lightweight instruction-tuned LLM can achieve strong TOD performance with very limited labeled data, while releasing code and evaluating on multiple MultiWOZ versions. The paper also tests extreme low-data settings (1% and 5%) and includes ablations over backbones and LoRA configurations, which are useful. However, the headline claim of matching full-shot models is only partially true: on the standard Combined metric, Spec-TOD at 10% data (92.6) is below full-shot GALAXY (100.2) and UBAR (94.4/105.1). More importantly, the absence of a same-backbone flat fine-tuning control means the contribution of the proposed instruction/role decomposition over simply fine-tuning LLaMA-3-8B is not established. The significance of the work therefore rests on experiments that are currently missing or insufficiently controlled.

major comments (5)

[Section 4.3.3, Table 5] The claim that 'with only 10% of the training data, our model matches the performance of prior approaches that utilized the entire dataset' is not supported by the standard Combined metric. On MultiWOZ 2.2, Spec-TOD (10%) achieves Combined 92.6, while full-shot GALAXY is 100.2 and UBAR is 94.4; on MultiWOZ 2.0, full-shot UBAR reaches 105.1 versus Spec-TOD's 91.2. The claim holds only for Success and Inform scores, not for the Combined metric that is customary in this literature. Please either restrict the claim to the specific metrics where it holds, or provide a detailed analysis of why the Combined shortfall (driven largely by BLEU) does not undermine the data-efficiency conclusion.
[Section 4.2, Table 1] The statement in the Table 1 caption, 'The difference in mean is statistically significant (p < 0.01)', is unsupported by any reported statistics. The paper reports single runs without standard deviations, number of seeds, or the specific statistical test used. Since the claim of statistical significance underpins the comparison against baselines, please provide means and standard deviations over at least 3–5 seeds (or an equivalent resampling procedure) and specify the test and the exact comparisons being tested, or remove the significance claim.
[Section 4 (experimental design)] No ablation isolates the proposed six-role instruction decomposition. Every experiment in Section 4 trains with the Spec-TOD prompt format and role-specific loss masking, so the observed gains at 10% data could be attributed primarily to the strong pretrained backbone (LLaMA-3-8B) and LoRA tuning rather than the framework's contribution. Please add a control that fine-tunes the same LLaMA-3-8B on the same MultiWOZ data with a flat text-to-text format—no role labels, no per-task instructions, no domain/function JSON—and compare all metrics. Without this baseline, the core novelty claim of Sections 3.2–3.3 cannot be validated.
[Section 4.2, Table 2 (GPT-score)] The GPT-4o-based evaluation lacks essential details needed to support the claim that GPT-score 'reflects better semantic accuracy': the number of evaluated dialogues, the exact judge prompt, the sampling temperature, and any human-agreement or reproducibility analysis are not given. Please provide these details and a reliability analysis (e.g., correlation with human judgments or agreement across judge runs), otherwise this evaluation is not reproducible and the claim is not substantiated.
[Section 4.2, Table 1 and Section 4.3.3] The comparisons are confounded by backbone, model scale, and pretraining. The full-shot baselines (GALAXY, UBAR, Mars) use older, smaller pretrained models, and the few-shot baselines (MinTL, PPTOD, Mars-G) are not LLMs at all. The data-efficiency argument would be much stronger if the paper compared against the same LLaMA-3-8B backbone fine-tuned on the full dataset (with the same LoRA setup) and against a flat-format control. Please add such comparisons or explicitly discuss how this confound affects the stated conclusions.

minor comments (7)

[Section 3.2.4, Eq. (10)] The spelled item 'NoOfFfer' appears to be a typo for 'NoOffer'; the bullet list below it uses the correct spelling.
[Appendix A.2, Figure 7] The example JSON contains a malformed string: 'description': "hotel reservations and vacation stays. " is missing a closing quote before the period; please correct the JSON formatting.
[Section 3.2.3] The Policy Instruction component is described only as deriving an observation and is not a learned task, but the appendix lists prompt templates only for Domain Selection, DST, and Response Generation. Please clarify whether this component is rule-based or prompt-only and include its instruction template in the appendix for reproducibility.
[Section 4.1 and Table 1] The capitalization of the backbone model is inconsistent: 'LLama-3-8B' appears in Table 1 while 'LLaMA-3-8B' is used elsewhere; please unify.
[Section 4.3.4, Figure 5] No details are given about the zero-shot GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 prompts used for the DST comparison; without these, the comparison is not reproducible.
[Section 1 and Abstract] The claim of being 'the first LLM-based framework explicitly designed for trainable end-to-end TOD systems' is very strong and should be softened unless a comprehensive related-work search demonstrates novelty; prior instruction-tuned TOD approaches exist.
[Section 4.3.2, Table 4] The conclusion that 'the proposed method does not benefit from a high number of fine-tuned parameters' is not clearly supported by the table: rank 64/alpha 128 yields Combined 91.64, close to the best rank 32/alpha 16 value of 92.56, and no variance is reported. Please add a more nuanced interpretation or additional configurations to support the claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: Spec-TOD's central claims are empirical comparisons and standard fine-tuning results, not identities between model inputs and predicted outputs.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing claims are empirical: Section 4 reports Inform, Success, BLEU, Combined, and JGA numbers after LoRA fine-tuning LLaMA-3-8B on MultiWOZ subsets. Section 3 defines the task decomposition and loss function as L = L_DS + L_DST + L_RG, but this is a training objective, not a quantity that is later 'predicted' from itself. The 10%-data efficiency claim in Section 4.3.3 is a comparison to published baselines, not a fitted parameter disguised as a prediction. LoRA rank/alpha are tuned on dev data, which is standard practice and does not make the reported test-set numbers circular. The only self-citation (Chieu et al. 2024) appears in related work and is not used to justify the framework's validity. The absence of a flat fine-tuning control is a real attribution weakness, but a missing ablation is not circular reasoning: it does not show that any claimed result reduces to its own input by construction. Accordingly, the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The framework introduces no new mathematical constructs or postulated entities. Its load-bearing components are standard LoRA instruction tuning plus a hand-designed prompt scheme. The main uncharged assumptions are that the role-based prompts are the cause of the gains and that the MultiWOZ benchmark, including its database interface, is the right testbed for low-resource TOD.

free parameters (5)

LoRA rank = 32
Selected from Table 4 ablation on MultiWOZ 2.2 dev; rank 32 with alpha 16 gave best Combined and JGA.
LoRA alpha = 16
Selected together with rank from Table 4 ablation, best trade-off between compression and generalization.
learning rate = 3e-4
Reported in Section 4.1 without sensitivity analysis.
training epochs = 4
Reported in Section 4.1 without sensitivity analysis.
action description grouping = six action types compressed from MultiWOZ schema
Section 3.2.4 groups schema actions into six descriptions (Info, Request, NoOffer, Recommend, Select, General); this hand-designed mapping shapes the response generation task.

assumptions (4)

standard math Cross-entropy losses for domain selection, function calling, and response generation are independent and can be summed (Eq. 11).
The paper averages task-specific losses without weighting; this assumes equal importance and no gradient interference.
domain assumption MultiWOZ annotations across versions are consistent enough that a model trained on 10% of one version transfers to evaluation on another.
The paper compares 10% runs on MultiWOZ 2.0 and 2.2 and reports similar or better numbers on 2.2, implying annotation differences do not matter.
domain assumption The database observation (number of matching entities) is accurate and available at inference time in the low-resource deployment scenario.
The method depends on querying the database between DST and response generation; a real low-resource system may lack such a database.
ad hoc to paper The six-role prompt structure is a suitable inductive bias for learning all TOD tasks simultaneously.
No analysis or ablation justifies the role layout; it is a design choice fixed from the start.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spec-TOD: A Specialized Instruction-Tuned LLM Framework for Efficient Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DB633IRL

@misc{pith2026250704841,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spec-TOD: A Specialized Instruction-Tuned LLM Framework for Efficient Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DB633IRL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.04841}
}

read the original abstract

Task-oriented dialogue (TOD) systems facilitate goal-driven interactions between users and machines. While recent advances in deep learning have improved the performance, TOD systems often struggle in low-resource scenarios with limited labeled data. To address this challenge, we propose Spec-TOD, a novel framework designed to train an end-to-end TOD system with limited data. Spec-TOD introduces two main innovations: (i) a novel specialized end-to-end TOD framework that incorporates explicit task instructions for instruction-tuned large language models (LLMs), and (ii) an efficient training strategy that leverages lightweight, specialized LLMs to achieve strong performance with minimal supervision. Experiments on the MultiWOZ dataset, a widely used TOD benchmark, demonstrate that Spec-TOD achieves competitive results while significantly reducing the need for labeled data. These findings highlight the potential of the proposed framework in advancing efficient and effective TOD systems in low-resource settings.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.04841 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Overview of TOD training methods. The solid line arrows and the dashed arrows represent data propagation and gradient propagation, respectively. to end-to-end TOD methods, as illustrated in the 1 https://github.com/quangvinh2110/Spec-TOD [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Overview of the Spec-TOD framework, which includes four main specified tasks: Domain Selection, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (5 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: An example of our prompt construction with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Performance comparison of our proposed method, training on 10 % data with GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on DST task across different domains. revolutionized NLP applications by enabling zeroshot and few-shot generalization capabilities. However, utilizing LLMs for tasks requirin…

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Prompt template for Domain Selection task [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Prompt template for Dialogue State Tracking task [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Prompt template for Response Generation task [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

MemGuide: Intent-Driven Memory Selection for Goal-Oriented Multi-Session LLM Agents
cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

MemGuide retrieves and filters past dialogue memories by intent and missing slots, and on its new synthetic benchmark MS-TOD it improves task success by 11 points and shortens dialogues by 2.84 turns.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

12 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

name: inform description: provide information about an entity (if multiple matched results exist, choose one) in the form of [value_xxx] if requested by the user (required)

work page
[2]

name: request description: inform the number of available offers ([value_choice]) and ask the user for more preference on the requested entity to narrow down the search results (optional)

work page
[3]

name": "hotel

name: nooffer description: inform the user that no suitable offer could be found ... <Function_Specification> { "name": "hotel", "description": "hotel reservations and vacation stays", "arguments": [ { "name": "pricerange", "type": "string", "description": "price budget of the hotel", "possible_values": [ "expensive", "cheap", "moderate" ] }, { "name": "a...

work page
[6]

In Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Lin- guistics, EACL 2023, Dubrovnik, Croatia, May 2-6, 2023, pages 886–901

Zero and few-shot localization of task-oriented dialogue agents with a distilled representation. In Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Lin- guistics, EACL 2023, Dubrovnik, Croatia, May 2-6, 2023, pages 886–901. Association for Computational Linguistics. Jinjie Ni, Tom Young, Vlad Pandelea, Fuzha...

arXiv 2023
[9]

name": hotel

MultiWOZ 2.2 : A dialogue dataset with additional annotation corrections and state tracking baselines. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Natural Language Processing for Conversational AI, pages 109–117, Online. Association for Computa- tional Linguistics. Xiaoying Zhang, Baolin Peng, Kun Li, Jingyan Zhou, and Helen Meng. 2023. SGP-TOD: building task b...

work page 2023
[1303]

Zekun Li, Zhiyu Chen, Mike Ross, Patrick Huber, Se- ungwhan Moon, Zhaojiang Lin, Xin Dong, Adithya Sagar, Xifeng Yan, and Paul A

Association for Computational Linguistics. Zekun Li, Zhiyu Chen, Mike Ross, Patrick Huber, Se- ungwhan Moon, Zhaojiang Lin, Xin Dong, Adithya Sagar, Xifeng Yan, and Paul A. Crook. 2024. Large language models as zero-shot dialogue state tracker through function calling. In Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguist...

work page 2024
[2020]

In Proceedings of The 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, LREC 2020, Marseille, France, May 11-16, 2020, pages 422–428

Multiwoz 2.1: A consolidated multi-domain dialogue dataset with state corrections and state track- ing baselines. In Proceedings of The 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, LREC 2020, Marseille, France, May 11-16, 2020, pages 422–428. European Language Resources Association. Yujie Feng, Zexin Lu, Bo Liu, Liming Zhan, and Xiao- Ming Wu. 2023....

arXiv 2020
[2022]

In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue, pages 351–360, Edinburgh, UK

MultiWOZ 2.4: A multi-domain task-oriented dialogue dataset with essential annotation corrections to improve state tracking evaluation. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue, pages 351–360, Edinburgh, UK. Association for Computational Lin- guistics. Xiaoxue Zang, Abhinav Rastogi, Srinivas Sunkara...

work page

Show all 12 references

[2023]

In Findings of the As- sociation for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023, Toronto, Canada, July 9-14, 2023, pages 7355–7369

Task-optimized adapters for an end-to-end task-oriented dialogue system. In Findings of the As- sociation for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023, Toronto, Canada, July 9-14, 2023, pages 7355–7369. Association for Computational Linguistics. Jianzhu Bao, Rui Wang, Yasheng Wang,...

2023
[2763]

Association for Computational Linguistics. An Yang, Baosong Yang, Binyuan Hui, Bo Zheng, Bowen Yu, Chang Zhou, Chengpeng Li, Chengyuan Li, Dayiheng Liu, Fei Huang, Guanting Dong, Hao- ran Wei, Huan Lin, Jialong Tang, Jialin Wang, Jian Yang, Jianhong Tu, Jianwei Zhang, Jianxin ...

2024 arXiv
[3405]

Fei Mi, Yasheng Wang, and Yitong Li

Association for Computational Linguistics. Fei Mi, Yasheng Wang, and Yitong Li. 2022. CINS: comprehensive instruction for few-shot learning in task-oriented dialog systems. In Thirty-Sixth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2022, Thirty-Fourth Conference on Innov...

2022
[8704]

Zhaojiang Lin, Andrea Madotto, Genta Indra Winata, and Pascale Fung

Association for Computational Linguistics. Zhaojiang Lin, Andrea Madotto, Genta Indra Winata, and Pascale Fung. 2020. Mintl: Minimalist trans- fer learning for task-oriented dialogue systems. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Proces...

2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

name: inform description: provide information about an entity (if multiple matched results exist, choose one) in the form of [value_xxx] if requested by the user (required)

work page

[2] [2]

name: request description: inform the number of available offers ([value_choice]) and ask the user for more preference on the requested entity to narrow down the search results (optional)

work page

[3] [3]

name": "hotel

name: nooffer description: inform the user that no suitable offer could be found ... <Function_Specification> { "name": "hotel", "description": "hotel reservations and vacation stays", "arguments": [ { "name": "pricerange", "type": "string", "description": "price budget of the hotel", "possible_values": [ "expensive", "cheap", "moderate" ] }, { "name": "a...

work page

[4] [6]

In Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Lin- guistics, EACL 2023, Dubrovnik, Croatia, May 2-6, 2023, pages 886–901

Zero and few-shot localization of task-oriented dialogue agents with a distilled representation. In Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Lin- guistics, EACL 2023, Dubrovnik, Croatia, May 2-6, 2023, pages 886–901. Association for Computational Linguistics. Jinjie Ni, Tom Young, Vlad Pandelea, Fuzha...

arXiv 2023

[5] [9]

name": hotel

MultiWOZ 2.2 : A dialogue dataset with additional annotation corrections and state tracking baselines. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Natural Language Processing for Conversational AI, pages 109–117, Online. Association for Computa- tional Linguistics. Xiaoying Zhang, Baolin Peng, Kun Li, Jingyan Zhou, and Helen Meng. 2023. SGP-TOD: building task b...

work page 2023

[6] [1303]

Zekun Li, Zhiyu Chen, Mike Ross, Patrick Huber, Se- ungwhan Moon, Zhaojiang Lin, Xin Dong, Adithya Sagar, Xifeng Yan, and Paul A

Association for Computational Linguistics. Zekun Li, Zhiyu Chen, Mike Ross, Patrick Huber, Se- ungwhan Moon, Zhaojiang Lin, Xin Dong, Adithya Sagar, Xifeng Yan, and Paul A. Crook. 2024. Large language models as zero-shot dialogue state tracker through function calling. In Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguist...

work page 2024

[7] [2020]

In Proceedings of The 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, LREC 2020, Marseille, France, May 11-16, 2020, pages 422–428

Multiwoz 2.1: A consolidated multi-domain dialogue dataset with state corrections and state track- ing baselines. In Proceedings of The 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, LREC 2020, Marseille, France, May 11-16, 2020, pages 422–428. European Language Resources Association. Yujie Feng, Zexin Lu, Bo Liu, Liming Zhan, and Xiao- Ming Wu. 2023....

arXiv 2020

[8] [2022]

In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue, pages 351–360, Edinburgh, UK

MultiWOZ 2.4: A multi-domain task-oriented dialogue dataset with essential annotation corrections to improve state tracking evaluation. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue, pages 351–360, Edinburgh, UK. Association for Computational Lin- guistics. Xiaoxue Zang, Abhinav Rastogi, Srinivas Sunkara...

work page