analiza aiqbench
This research addresses a critical gap in on-device AI agents by developing synthetic supervision methods to improve the reliability of small language models in call-screening tasks. The study demonstrates significant gains in response qualification and summary accuracy for models ranging from 0.6B to 4B parameters, effectively mitigating hallucinations while preserving privacy constraints.
Quality-Controlled Reply and Summary Data for Post-Training Small Language Models in AI Call-Screening Agents
arXiv:2610.25458v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Small language models have improved to the point where a phone can plausibly screen its own calls, answering on an absent owner's behalf without sending call content off the device, a privacy-respecting alternative to cloud call handling. Realizing that promise takes a model that can do two things well: reply within the owner's authority during the call, and afterward tell the owner what happened and what needs attention. Released small models do neither reliably - they raise unwarranted alarms about ordinary callers and write summaries that drop material conditions or report a caller's claims as fact - and real calls supply no reference replies or summaries to learn from. We construct supervision for both tasks from synthetic calls under an information-boundary constraint: a caller writer works from a private scenario brief, a reply writer sees only the conversation up to the current turn, and a summary writer sees the completed transcript. Separate model-based reviews of the full dialogue and the summary decide which calls enter training, yielding a corpus of 3,395 calls with 15,102 targets (11,707 reply, 3,395 summary). Training a single shared LoRA adapter on both tasks, we evaluate six models (0.6-4B parameters) before and after adaptation on 192 held-out calls. Reply qualification rises from 21-54% to 94-97% and summary qualification from 0-6% to 43-72%; all twelve paired gains (six models x two tasks) have bootstrap intervals above zero, and the summary gains hold in every source family. Because one model both screened the training data and scored the outputs, these rates measure agreement with that evaluator's standard rather than human acceptance, which a planned human study will test. After adaptation, coherence and naturalness failures nearly vanish, leaving grounding and usefulness - faithfully tracking who said what, under which conditions - as the remaining challenge.
Abstract:Small language models have improved to the point where a phone can plausibly screen its own calls, answering on an absent owner's behalf without sending call content off the device, a privacy-respecting alternative to cloud call handling. Realizing that promise takes a model that can do two things well: reply within the owner's authority during the call, and afterward tell the owner what happened and what needs attention. Released small models do neither reliably - they raise unwarranted alarms about ordinary callers and write summaries that drop material conditions or report a caller's claims as fact - and real calls supply no reference replies or summaries to learn from. We construct supervision for both tasks from synthetic calls under an information-boundary constraint: a caller writer works from a private scenario brief, a reply writer sees only the conversation up to the current turn, and a summary writer sees the completed transcript. Separate model-based reviews of the full dialogue and the summary decide which calls enter training, yielding a corpus of 3,395 calls with 15,102 targets (11,707 reply, 3,395 summary). Training a single shared LoRA adapter on both tasks, we evaluate six models (0.6-4B parameters) before and after adaptation on 192 held-out calls. Reply qualification rises from 21-54% to 94-97% and summary qualification from 0-6% to 43-72%; all twelve paired gains (six models x two tasks) have bootstrap intervals above zero, and the summary gains hold in every source family. Because one model both screened the training data and scored the outputs, these rates measure agreement with that evaluator's standard rather than human acceptance, which a planned human study will test. After adaptation, coherence and naturalness failures nearly vanish, leaving grounding and usefulness - faithfully tracking who said what, under which conditions - as the remaining challenge.
Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2610.25458 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2610.25458v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.25458 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 391 cuvinte