Toward Design Archetypes for Conversational Agent Personality
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conversational agents (CAs), often referred to as chatbots, are being widely deployed within existing commercial frameworks and online service websites. As society moves further into incorporating data rich systems, like the internet of things (IoT), into daily life, it is expected that conversational agents will take on an increasingly important role to help users manage these complex systems. In this, the concept of personality is becoming increasingly important, as we seek for more human-friendly ways to interact with these CAs. In this work a conceptual framework is proposed that considers how existing standard psychological and persona models could be mapped to different kinds of CA functionality outside of strictly dialogue. As CAs become more diverse in their abilities, and more integrated with different kinds of systems, it is important to consider how function can be impacted by the design of agent personality, whether intentionally designed or not. Based on this framework, derived archetype classes of CAs are presented as starting points that can hopefully aid designers, developers, and the curious, into thinking about how to work toward better CA personality development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it