Conversational agents built on large language models (LLMs) are becoming increasingly prevalent, yet most systems are designed for one-on-one, turn-based exchanges rather than natural, asynchronous group chats. As AI assistants become widespread throughout digital platforms, from virtual assistants to customer service, developing natural and humanlike interaction patterns seems crucial for maintaining user trust and engagement. We present the Humanlike Multi-user Agent (HUMA), an LLM-based facilitator that participates in multi-party conversations using human-like strategies and timing. HUMA extends prior multi-user chatbot work with an event-driven architecture that handles messages, replies, reactions and introduces realistic response-time simulation. HUMA comprises three components--Router, Action Agent, and Reflection--which together adapt LLMs to group conversation dynamics. We evaluate HUMA in a controlled study with 97 participants in four-person role-play chats, comparing AI and human community managers (CMs). Participants classified CMs as human at near-chance rates in both conditions, indicating they could not reliably distinguish HUMA agents from humans. Subjective experience was comparable across conditions: community-manager effectiveness, social presence, and engagement/satisfaction differed only modestly with small effect sizes. Our results suggest that, in natural group chat settings, an AI facilitator can match human quality while remaining difficult to identify as nonhuman.

Growing literature explores toxicity and polarization in discourse, with comparatively less work on characterizing what makes dialogue prosocial and constructive. We explore conversational discourse and investigate a method for characterizing its quality built upon the notion of ``responsivity'' -- whether one person's conversational turn is responding to a preceding turn. We develop and evaluate methods for quantifying responsivity -- first through semantic similarity of speaker turns, and second by leveraging state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) to identify the relation between two speaker turns. We evaluate both methods against a ground truth set of human-annotated conversations. Furthermore, selecting the better performing LLM-based approach, we characterize the nature of the response -- whether it responded to that preceding turn in a substantive way or not. We view these responsivity links as a fundamental aspect of dialogue but note that conversations can exhibit significantly different responsivity structures. Accordingly, we then develop conversation-level derived metrics to address various aspects of conversational discourse. We use these derived metrics to explore other conversations and show that they support meaningful characterizations and differentiations across a diverse collection of conversations.

While humans are inherently social creatures, the challenge of identifying when and how to assist and collaborate with others - particularly when pursuing independent goals - can hinder cooperation. To address this challenge, we aim to develop an AI system that provides useful feedback to promote prosocial behaviour - actions that benefit others, even when not directly aligned with one's own goals. We introduce Pro-T oM, a Theory of Mind-informed facilitator that promotes prosocial actions in multi-agent systems by providing targeted, context-sensitive feedback to individual agents. Pro-ToM first infers agents' goals using Bayesian inverse planning, then selects feedback to communicate by maximising expected utility, conditioned on the inferred goal distribution. We evaluate our approach against baselines in two multi-agent environments: Doors, Keys, and Gems, as well as Overcooked. Our results suggest that state-of-the-art large language and reasoning models fall short of communicating feedback that is both contextually grounded and well-timed - leading to higher communication overhead and task speedup. In contrast, ProToM provides targeted and helpful feedback, achieving a higher success rate, shorter task completion times, and is consistently preferred by human users.

We consider a setting where goods are allocated to agents by way of an allocation platform (e.g., a matching platform). An "allocation facilitator" aims to increase the overall utility/social-good of the allocation by encouraging (some of the) agents to relax (some of) their restrictions. At the same time, the advice must not hurt agents who would otherwise be better off. Additionally, the facilitator may be constrained by a "bound" (a.k.a. 'budget'), limiting the number and/or type of restrictions it may seek to relax. We consider the facilitator's optimization problem of choosing an optimal set of restrictions to request to relax under the aforementioned constraints. Our contributions are three-fold: (i) We provide a formal definition of the problem, including the participation guarantees to which the facilitator should adhere. We define a hierarchy of participation guarantees and also consider several social-good functions.

Successful group meetings, such as those implemented in group behavioral-change programs, work meetings, and other social contexts, must promote individual goal setting and execution while strengthening the social relationships within the group. Consequently, an ideal facilitator must be sensitive to the subtle dynamics of disengagement, difficulties with individual goal setting and execution, and interpersonal difficulties that signal a need for intervention. The challenges and cognitive load experienced by facilitators create a critical gap for an embodied technology that can interpret social exchanges while remaining aware of the needs of the individuals in the group and providing transparent recommendations that go beyond powerful but "black box" foundation models (FMs) that identify social cues. We address this important demand with a social robot co-facilitator that analyzes multimodal meeting data and provides discreet cues to the facilitator. The robot's reasoning is powered by an agentic concept bottleneck model (CBM), which makes decisions based on human-interpretable concepts like participant engagement and sentiments, ensuring transparency and trustworthiness. Our core contribution is a transfer learning framework that distills the broad social understanding of an FM into our specialized and transparent CBM. This concept-driven system significantly outperforms direct zero-shot FMs in predicting the need for intervention and enables real-time human correction of its reasoning. Critically, we demonstrate robust knowledge transfer: the model generalizes across different groups and successfully transfers the expertise of senior human facilitators to improve the performance of novices. By transferring an expert's cognitive model into an interpretable robotic partner, our work provides a powerful blueprint for augmenting human capabilities in complex social domains.

The development of high-performing, robust, and reliable speech technologies depends on large, high-quality datasets. However, African languages -- including our focus, Igbo, Hausa, and Yoruba -- remain under-represented due to insufficient data. Popular voice-enabled technologies do not support any of the 2000+ African languages, limiting accessibility for circa one billion people. While previous dataset efforts exist for the target languages, they lack the scale and diversity needed for robust speech models. To bridge this gap, we introduce the NaijaVoices dataset, a 1,800-hour speech-text dataset with 5,000+ speakers. We outline our unique data collection approach, analyze its acoustic diversity, and demonstrate its impact through finetuning experiments on automatic speech recognition, averagely achieving 75.86% (Whisper), 52.06% (MMS), and 42.33% (XLSR) WER improvements. These results highlight NaijaVoices' potential to advance multilingual speech processing for African languages.

However, deliberative forums such as citizens' assemblies have shown promise in bypassing party polarization and fostering productive discussions on contentious political issues [3]. Unfortunately, most deliberations do not take place in carefully structured settings with nationally representative participants. Instead, they often occur within homogeneous groups [17]. When this happens, deliberation can lead to group polarization, where individuals become more extreme in their initial positions rather than engaging with opposing viewpoints [22]. This can be problematic if the goal of deliberation is to build common ground and consensus within a pluralistic electorate. Given that large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated some fidelity in accurately responding to opinion surveys [1, 20] and adopting different personas [12], we explore whether an LLM-powered tool can help introduce missing perspectives in group deliberation.

Consensus building is inherently challenging due to the diverse opinions held by stakeholders. Effective facilitation is crucial to support the consensus building process and enable efficient group decision making. However, the effectiveness of facilitation is often constrained by human factors such as limited experience and scalability. In this research, we propose a Parallel Thinking-based Facilitation Agent (PTFA) that facilitates online, text-based consensus building processes. The PTFA automatically collects textual posts and leverages large language models (LLMs) to perform all of the six distinct roles of the well-established Six Thinking Hats technique in parallel thinking. To illustrate the potential of PTFA, a pilot study was carried out and PTFA's ability in idea generation, emotional probing, and deeper analysis of ideas was demonstrated. Furthermore, a comprehensive dataset that contains not only the conversational content among the participants but also between the participants and the agent is constructed for future study.

We present a survey of methods for assessing and enhancing the quality of online discussions, focusing on the potential of Large Language Models (LLMs). While online discourses aim, at least in theory, to foster mutual understanding, they often devolve into harmful exchanges, such as hate speech, threatening social cohesion and democratic values. Recent advancements in LLMs enable facilitation agents that not only moderate content, but also actively improve the quality of interactions. Our survey synthesizes ideas from Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Social Sciences to provide (a) a new taxonomy on discussion quality evaluation, (b) an overview of intervention and facilitation strategies, along with a new taxonomy on conversation facilitation datasets, (c) an LLM-oriented roadmap of good practices and future research directions, from technological and societal perspectives.

Achieving consensus in group decision-making often involves overcoming significant challenges, particularly in reconciling diverse perspectives and mitigating biases that hinder agreement. Traditional methods relying on human facilitators are often constrained by scalability and efficiency, especially in large-scale, fast-paced discussions. To address these challenges, this study proposes a novel framework employing large language models (LLMs) as automated facilitators within a custom-built multi-user chat system. Leveraging cosine similarity as a core metric, this approach evaluates the ability of three state-of-the-art LLMs- ChatGPT 4.0, Mistral Large 2, and AI21 Jamba Instruct- to synthesize consensus proposals that align with participants' viewpoints. Unlike conventional techniques, the system integrates adaptive facilitation strategies, including clarifying misunderstandings, summarizing discussions, and proposing compromises, enabling the LLMs to iteratively refine consensus proposals based on user feedback. Experimental results demonstrate the superiority of ChatGPT 4.0, which achieves higher alignment with participant opinions, requiring fewer iterations to reach consensus compared to its counterparts. Moreover, analysis reveals the nuanced performance of the models across various sustainability-focused discussion topics, such as climate action, quality education, good health and well-being, and access to clean water and sanitation. These findings highlight the transformative potential of LLM-driven facilitation for improving collective decision-making processes and underscore the importance of advancing evaluation metrics and cross-cultural adaptability in future research.