Abstract:Helping people identify and pursue personally meaningful career goals at scale remains a key challenge in applied psychology. Career coaching can improve goal quality and attainment, but its cost and limited availability restrict access. Large language model (LLM)-based chatbots offer a scalable alternative, yet the psychological mechanisms by which they might support goal pursuit remain untested. Here we report a preregistered three-arm randomised controlled trial (N = 517) comparing an AI career coach ("Leon," powered by Claude Sonnet), a matched structured written questionnaire covering closely matched reflective topics, and a no-support control on goal progress at a two-week follow-up. The AI chatbot produced significantly higher goal progress than the control (d = 0.33, p = .016). Compared with the written-reflection condition, the AI did not significantly improve overall goal progress, but it increased perceived social accountability. In the preregistered mediation model, perceived accountability mediated the AI-over-questionnaire effect on goal progress (indirect effect = 0.15, 95% CI [0.04, 0.31]), whereas self-concordance did not. These findings suggest that AI-assisted goal setting can improve short-term goal progress, and that its clearest added value over structured self-reflection lies in increasing felt accountability.
Abstract:We introduce the Ministral 3 series, a family of parameter-efficient dense language models designed for compute and memory constrained applications, available in three model sizes: 3B, 8B, and 14B parameters. For each model size, we release three variants: a pretrained base model for general-purpose use, an instruction finetuned, and a reasoning model for complex problem-solving. In addition, we present our recipe to derive the Ministral 3 models through Cascade Distillation, an iterative pruning and continued training with distillation technique. Each model comes with image understanding capabilities, all under the Apache 2.0 license.
Abstract:While modern dialogue systems heavily rely on large language models (LLMs), their implementation often goes beyond pure LLM interaction. Developers integrate multiple LLMs, external tools, and databases. Therefore, assessment of the underlying LLM alone does not suffice, and the dialogue systems must be tested and evaluated as a whole. However, this remains a major challenge. With most previous work focusing on turn-level analysis, less attention has been paid to integrated dialogue-level quality assurance. To address this, we present ChatChecker, a framework for automated evaluation and testing of complex dialogue systems. ChatChecker uses LLMs to simulate diverse user interactions, identify dialogue breakdowns, and evaluate quality. Compared to previous approaches, our design reduces setup effort and is generalizable, as it does not require reference dialogues and is decoupled from the implementation of the target dialogue system. We improve breakdown detection performance over a prior LLM-based approach by including an error taxonomy in the prompt. Additionally, we propose a novel non-cooperative user simulator based on challenging personas that uncovers weaknesses in target dialogue systems more effectively. Through this, ChatChecker contributes to thorough and scalable testing. This enables both researchers and practitioners to accelerate the development of robust dialogue systems.