Research

Paper

AI LLM March 23, 2026

MIND: Multi-agent inference for negotiation dialogue in travel planning

Authors

Hunmin Do, Taejun Yoon, Kiyong Jung

Abstract

While Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) research has advanced, its efficacy in coordinating complex stakeholder interests such as travel planning remains largely unexplored. To bridge this gap, we propose MIND (Multi-agent Inference for Negotiation Dialogue), a framework designed to simulate realistic consensus-building among travelers with heterogeneous preferences. Grounded in the Theory of Mind (ToM), MIND introduces a Strategic Appraisal phase that infers opponent willingness (w) from linguistic nuances with 90.2% accuracy. Experimental results demonstrate that MIND outperforms traditional MAD frameworks, achieving a 20.5% improvement in High-w Hit and a 30.7% increase in Debate Hit-Rate, effectively prioritizing high-stakes constraints. Furthermore, qualitative evaluations via LLM-as-a-Judge confirm that MIND surpasses baselines in Rationality (68.8%) and Fluency (72.4%), securing an overall win rate of 68.3%. These findings validate that MIND effectively models human negotiation dynamics to derive persuasive consensus.

Metadata

arXiv ID: 2603.21696
Provider: ARXIV
Primary Category: cs.AI
Published: 2026-03-23
Fetched: 2026-03-24 06:02

Related papers

Raw Data (Debug)
{
  "raw_xml": "<entry>\n    <id>http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.21696v1</id>\n    <title>MIND: Multi-agent inference for negotiation dialogue in travel planning</title>\n    <updated>2026-03-23T08:31:15Z</updated>\n    <link href='https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.21696v1' rel='alternate' type='text/html'/>\n    <link href='https://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.21696v1' rel='related' title='pdf' type='application/pdf'/>\n    <summary>While Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) research has advanced, its efficacy in coordinating complex stakeholder interests such as travel planning remains largely unexplored. To bridge this gap, we propose MIND (Multi-agent Inference for Negotiation Dialogue), a framework designed to simulate realistic consensus-building among travelers with heterogeneous preferences. Grounded in the Theory of Mind (ToM), MIND introduces a Strategic Appraisal phase that infers opponent willingness (w) from linguistic nuances with 90.2% accuracy. Experimental results demonstrate that MIND outperforms traditional MAD frameworks, achieving a 20.5% improvement in High-w Hit and a 30.7% increase in Debate Hit-Rate, effectively prioritizing high-stakes constraints. Furthermore, qualitative evaluations via LLM-as-a-Judge confirm that MIND surpasses baselines in Rationality (68.8%) and Fluency (72.4%), securing an overall win rate of 68.3%. These findings validate that MIND effectively models human negotiation dynamics to derive persuasive consensus.</summary>\n    <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='cs.AI'/>\n    <published>2026-03-23T08:31:15Z</published>\n    <arxiv:comment>Accepted at ICLR 2026 Workshop (HCAIR)</arxiv:comment>\n    <arxiv:primary_category term='cs.AI'/>\n    <author>\n      <name>Hunmin Do</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Taejun Yoon</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Kiyong Jung</name>\n    </author>\n  </entry>"
}