Clinical diagnosis requires progressive integration of patient history, physical examination, laboratory findings, medical images, and diagnostic-informative tests. However, most multimodal medical benchmarks evaluate fixed inputs or endpoint answers, while fully interactive diagnostic agents conflate evidence selection with evidence interpretation. We present a source-grounded framework to construct progressive multimodal diagnostic dialogues from case reports and an evaluation strategy for assessing MLLMs on final diagnosis, diagnostic reasoning, and image-finding interpretation. Evaluation on 24 internal medicine case reports showed that our framework can accurately convert case reports into reference dialogues, achieving a diagnosis F1 of 0.99 and a reasoning-quality score of 4.79 out of 5. Evaluation on two frontier MLLMs (o4-mini and Claude Haiku 4.5) achieved reasoning-quality scores of 2.75 and 2.50, respectively, with substantially lower diagnosis, reasoning, and image-finding F1 scores. The results demonstrate that fluent responses do not necessarily reflect evidence-grounded clinical reasoning and highlight the utility of the proposed framework for evaluating multimodal diagnostic reasoning.
Situated language use is multimodal and embodied. For example, gestures can carry information that is absent or underspecified in the speech signal, yet dialogue models typically rely on transcripts alone. We study how much referential information gestures and their combination with speech carry in multimodal dialogue under different partner visibility conditions. % We build models that identify the intended referent in a video-mediated referential communication game based on either the speech transcript, the skeletal representation of gesture, or both modalities. Our results show that gesture alone is predictive of the intended referent and that multimodal fusion is most beneficial when the transcript-based model is uncertain. Training-only alignment of learned representations with the referent image further improves the fusion model performance. % In a comparison with human interaction data, we further see pragmatic effects of interlocutor visibility on gesture production and informativeness as well as an entrainment effect in speech and multimodal, but not gesture, performance across rounds of repeated interaction. We thus make contributions to the technical modelling of multimodal information in human dialogue and the analysis of human interaction data via trained model representations.
Marcel Heisler, Luca Randecker, Christian Becker-Asanocs.RO cs.AI cs.HC
Previous research has shown that a human-like robot's acceptance heavily depends on the setting in which it operates and its ability to perform relevant tasks. This paper, first, reports on how our robot processes natural language to generate a multimodal, verbal response integrating emotional expressions based on an emotion simulation backend. Then, it describes how visitors were invited to speak with our robot in their own language at three different, public locations, where the robot was running continuously for several days. The TAM2 questionnaire results reveal that on average users were motivated to use the robot and found it rather useful and easy to use regardless of the specific location. However, public spaces like the tourist information and the city library seem to be a better fit for our interactive, robotic head than an office environment such as the building authority, where the willingness to interact was lower. Overall, the robot's multi-lingual responses were very much appreciated, but every fifth user found the response time too slow impeding the dialog flow, which remains to be improved in future work.
Linyun Xiang, Mark Neerincx, Stephanie Tancs.CL cs.AI cs.MA
Existing text summarization research has focused much on monologic information (e.g., newspaper articles, reports) without accounting for the interaction between speakers or authors. In contrast, dialogues are a rich communication channel where multiple participants conduct back and forth exchanges to construct meaning. We propose a dialogue summarization framework that explicitly models both semantic and emotion dynamics using multimodal dialogue inputs, built on an adapted hierarchical Chain-of-Agents approach. We decompose dialogues from two perspectives: (1) topic segments based on the utterances of all participants, and (2) participant-specific utterance segments. These are used to generate corresponding summaries while incorporating automatically inferred emotions. Topic- and participant-level summaries are aggregated into a dialogue summary capturing semantic content and emotion trajectories. To evaluate beyond content accuracy, we introduce emotion trajectory metrics measuring how well summaries preserve emotional flow. Experiments with small language models on multimodal dialogue datasets show that our framework produces summaries with both semantic and emotion content. Further experiments on explicit emotion label availability highlight the efficacy of our proposed methodology and the opportunities in dialogue analysis using language models.
Sherzod Hakimov, Mattia D'Agostini, Ivan Samodelkin +1cs.CV cs.AI cs.CL
We introduce the Image Reconstruction Game, a fully automated benchmark in which a vision-language model issues corrective instructions to an image generator across multiple turns, making accumulated common ground directly observable as a rendered image. Benchmarking two Describer models crossed with two Generator models across seven image categories, we find that the describer is the dominant factor in reconstruction quality, while the generator determines whether iterative refinement helps or hurts. Mathematical and geometric images pose the greatest challenge. The describer's token budget strongly affects convergence: shorter budgets yield sparser first renderings with more room for visible improvement, while longer budgets raise absolute quality but leave less to fix. Stronger describers use a richer correction vocabulary spanning spatial, numeric, and structural categories, while weaker describers concentrate on surface properties and tend to stop after a few turns. Human validation shows that the best automated judge reaches only slight-to-fair agreement with human preferences, and automated scores require human recalibration to be used reliably.