Date
Publisher
arXiv
While language model (LM)-powered chatbots and generative search engines
excel at answering concrete queries, discovering information in the terrain of
unknown unknowns remains challenging for users. To emulate the common
educational scenario where children/students learn by listening to and
participating in conversations of their parents/teachers, we create
Collaborative STORM (Co-STORM). Unlike QA systems that require users to ask all
the questions, Co-STORM lets users observe and occasionally steer the discourse
among several LM agents. The agents ask questions on the user's behalf,
allowing the user to discover unknown unknowns serendipitously. To facilitate
user interaction, Co-STORM assists users in tracking the discourse by
organizing the uncovered information into a dynamic mind map, ultimately
generating a comprehensive report as takeaways. For automatic evaluation, we
construct the WildSeek dataset by collecting real information-seeking records
with user goals. Co-STORM outperforms baseline methods on both discourse trace
and report quality. In a further human evaluation, 70% of participants prefer
Co-STORM over a search engine, and 78% favor it over a RAG chatbot.
Study at a glance
- Question: Can observing and participating in conversations between AI agents help people discover and learn new information?
- Setting and data: Real information-seeking records with user goals (WildSeek dataset) and an unspecified number of human evaluation participants.
- Method: System development, automated testing against baseline models, and a human preference evaluation.
Why it matters
While language model chatbots excel at answering concrete queries, discovering unknown unknowns remains challenging for users. Current systems require users to ask all the questions, unlike educational scenarios where students learn by listening to conversations.
Key findings
- In user testing, 78% of participants favored a collaborative multi-agent AI tool over a standard question-answering chatbot.
- Seventy percent of participants preferred the multi-agent conversational AI tool over a traditional search engine.
- The multi-agent AI system produced higher-quality discussion records and final reports than baseline methods.
Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.
What is the application?
Who is the user?
Who age?
Why use AI?
Study design

