Cited by 1Speech and dialogue systemsLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesSpeech Recognition and Synthesis

Turn-Taking Modelling in Conversational Systems: A Review of Recent Advances

Open access
Patamia, Rutherford Agbeshi, Dinh, Ha Pham Thien, Liu, Ming, Cosgun, Akansel·2025·Technologies

Abstract

Effective turn-taking is fundamental to conversational interactions, shaping the fluidity of communication across human dialogues and interactions with spoken dialogue systems (SDS). Despite its apparent simplicity, conversational turn-taking involves complex timing mechanisms influenced by various linguistic, prosodic, and multimodal cues. This review synthesises recent theoretical insights and practical advancements in understanding and modelling conversational timing dynamics, emphasising critical phenomena such as voice activity (VA), turn floor offsets (TFO), and predictive turn-taking. We first discuss foundational concepts, such as voice activity detection (VAD) and inter-pausal units (IPUs), and highlight their significance for systematically representing dialogue states. Central to the challenge of interactive systems is distinguishing moments when conversational roles shift versus when they remain with the current speaker, encapsulated by the concepts of “hold” and “shift”. The timing of these transitions, measured through Turn Floor Offsets (TFOs), aligns closely with minimal human reaction times, suggesting biological underpinnings while exhibiting cross-linguistic variability. This review further explores computational turn-taking heuristics and models, noting that simplistic strategies may reduce interruptions yet risk introducing unnatural delays. Integrating multimodal signals, prosodic, verbal, visual, and predictive mechanisms is emphasised as essential for future developments in achieving human-like conversational responsiveness.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/technologies13120591

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Patamia, R. A., Dinh, H. P. T., Liu, M., & Cosgun, A.
Affiliations
Deakin University (AU)
Corresponding author
  • Patamia, Rutherford Agbeshi
  • Cosgun, Akansel
Venue
Technologies
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2025-12-15
Volume
13
Issue
12
Pages
591
ISSN
2227-7080 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4417332296
Cited by
1
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1
FWCI
0.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Technologies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
Keywords
turn-taking, conversational timing, spoken dialogue systems, voice activity detection, prosodic cues, multimodal cues

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review