← 研踪 PaperTrailACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-short.63 · 记录 #1
Dialogue is the Plan: From Interface to Joint Action in Agentic AI
来源日期（仅到月份） 2026-07
来源记录日期 2026-07
雷达观测 2026-11-01 21:44
摘要
Large Language Model agents can seeminglyplan and act, yet their language use is oftentreated primarily as an interface for instructingactions and reporting results. We argue that thisframing is one important cause of recurrent coordination failures in human-facing and multiagent settings, including ungrounded assumptions, silent goal misalignment, brittle protocoladherence, and failures to maintain or updateshared dialogue state over time, a limitation previously linked to the absence of explicit common ground tracking in collaborative systems(Geib et al., 2022). Drawing from classical dialogue system research on joint action, commonground, grounding, repair, and incremental processing, we re-frame dialogue as part of theplanning loop itself (rather than its output). Wedistill this re-framing into concrete implicationsfor agentic architecture and evaluation, including explicit representations of shared commitments, clarification as a first class action available to the policy, and process metrics that approximate grounding behavior, repair, and commitment formation rather than task completionalone. We lastly discuss how dialogue-centeredrequirements can inform standards and governance for safe deployment of agentic systems.
论文发现出处
这些页面提供论文线索，不代表同行评审或质量认证。
观测到的版本
平台记录号代表本站观测到的元数据变化，不是作者修订号。来源日期仅到月份或年份时，按该月或该年首日存档。
记录 #1 · 2026-07 · 最新观测版本
Dialogue is the Plan: From Interface to Joint Action in Agentic AI
Large Language Model agents can seeminglyplan and act, yet their language use is oftentreated primarily as an interface for instructingactions and reporting results. We argue that thisframing is one important cause of recurrent coordination failures in human-facing and multiagent settings, including ungrounded assumptions, silent goal misalignment, brittle protocoladherence, and failures to maintain or updateshared dialogue state over time, a limitation previously linked to the absence of explicit common ground tracking in collaborative systems(Geib et al., 2022). Drawing from classical dialogue system research on joint action, commonground, grounding, repair, and incremental processing, we re-frame dialogue as part of theplanning loop itself (rather than its output). Wedistill this re-framing into concrete implicationsfor agentic architecture and evaluation, including explicit representations of shared commitments, clarification as a first class action available to the policy, and process metrics that approximate grounding behavior, repair, and commitment formation rather than task completionalone. We lastly discuss how dialogue-centeredrequirements can inform standards and governance for safe deployment of agentic systems.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗