Skip to content
← Back to explorer

SparkMe: Adaptive Semi-Structured Interviewing for Qualitative Insight Discovery

David Anugraha, Vishakh Padmakumar, Diyi Yang · Feb 24, 2026 · Citations: 0

How to use this paper page

Coverage: Stale

Use this page to decide whether the paper is strong enough to influence an eval design. It summarizes the abstract plus available structured metadata. If the signal is thin, use it as background context and compare it against stronger hub pages before making protocol choices.

Best use

Secondary protocol comparison source

Metadata: Stale

Trust level

Moderate

Signals: Stale

What still needs checking

No major weakness surfaced.

Signal confidence: 0.70

Abstract

Qualitative insights from user experiences are critical for informing product and policy decisions, but collecting such data at scale is constrained by the time and availability of experts to conduct semi-structured interviews. Recent work has explored using large language models (LLMs) to automate interviewing, yet existing systems lack a principled mechanism for balancing systematic coverage of predefined topics with adaptive exploration, or the ability to pursue follow-ups, deep dives, and emergent themes that arise organically during conversation. In this work, we formulate adaptive semi-structured interviewing as an optimization problem over the interviewer's behavior. We define interview utility as a trade-off between coverage of a predefined interview topic guide, discovery of relevant emergent themes, and interview cost measured by length. Based on this formulation, we introduce SparkMe, a multi-agent LLM interviewer that performs deliberative planning via simulated conversation rollouts to select questions with high expected utility. We evaluate SparkMe through controlled experiments with LLM-based interviewees, showing that it achieves higher interview utility, improving topic guide coverage (+4.7% over the best baseline) and eliciting richer emergent insights while using fewer conversational turns than prior LLM interviewing approaches. We further validate SparkMe in a user study with 70 participants across 7 professions on the impact of AI on their workflows. Domain experts rate SparkMe as producing high-quality adaptive interviews that surface helpful profession-specific insights not captured by prior approaches. The code, datasets, and evaluation protocols for SparkMe are available as open-source at https://github.com/SALT-NLP/SparkMe.

HFEPX Relevance Assessment

This paper has useful evaluation signal, but protocol completeness is partial; pair it with related papers before deciding implementation strategy.

Best use

Secondary protocol comparison source

Use if you need

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

Main weakness

No major weakness surfaced.

Trust level

Moderate

Eval-Fit Score

65/100 • Medium

Useful as a secondary reference; validate protocol details against neighboring papers.

Human Feedback Signal

Detected

Evaluation Signal

Detected

HFEPX Fit

Moderate-confidence candidate

Extraction confidence: Moderate

What This Page Found In The Paper

Each field below shows whether the signal looked explicit, partial, or missing in the available metadata. Use this to judge what is safe to trust directly and what still needs full-paper validation.

Human Feedback Types

strong

Expert Verification

Confidence: Moderate Direct evidence

Directly usable for protocol triage.

Evidence snippet: Qualitative insights from user experiences are critical for informing product and policy decisions, but collecting such data at scale is constrained by the time and availability of experts to conduct semi-structured interviews.

Evaluation Modes

strong

Automatic Metrics

Confidence: Moderate Direct evidence

Includes extracted eval setup.

Evidence snippet: Qualitative insights from user experiences are critical for informing product and policy decisions, but collecting such data at scale is constrained by the time and availability of experts to conduct semi-structured interviews.

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

Confidence: Low Not found

No explicit QC controls found.

Evidence snippet: Qualitative insights from user experiences are critical for informing product and policy decisions, but collecting such data at scale is constrained by the time and availability of experts to conduct semi-structured interviews.

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

Confidence: Low Not found

No benchmark anchors detected.

Evidence snippet: Qualitative insights from user experiences are critical for informing product and policy decisions, but collecting such data at scale is constrained by the time and availability of experts to conduct semi-structured interviews.

Reported Metrics

strong

Cost

Confidence: Moderate Direct evidence

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

Evidence snippet: We define interview utility as a trade-off between coverage of a predefined interview topic guide, discovery of relevant emergent themes, and interview cost measured by length.

Rater Population

strong

Domain Experts

Confidence: Moderate Direct evidence

Helpful for staffing comparability.

Evidence snippet: Qualitative insights from user experiences are critical for informing product and policy decisions, but collecting such data at scale is constrained by the time and availability of experts to conduct semi-structured interviews.

Human Data Lens

  • Uses human feedback: Yes
  • Feedback types: Expert Verification
  • Rater population: Domain Experts
  • Unit of annotation: Trajectory
  • Expertise required: Coding
  • Signal basis: Structured extraction plus abstract evidence.

Evaluation Lens

  • Evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics
  • Agentic eval: Multi Agent
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Signal confidence: 0.70
  • Known cautions: None surfaced in extraction.

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

cost

Research Brief

Metadata summary

Qualitative insights from user experiences are critical for informing product and policy decisions, but collecting such data at scale is constrained by the time and availability of experts to conduct semi-structured interviews.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • Qualitative insights from user experiences are critical for informing product and policy decisions, but collecting such data at scale is constrained by the time and availability of experts to conduct semi-structured interviews.
  • Recent work has explored using large language models (LLMs) to automate interviewing, yet existing systems lack a principled mechanism for balancing systematic coverage of predefined topics with adaptive exploration, or the ability to pursue follow-ups, deep dives, and emergent themes that arise organically during conversation.
  • In this work, we formulate adaptive semi-structured interviewing as an optimization problem over the interviewer's behavior.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Check the full text for explicit evaluation design choices (raters, protocol, and metrics).
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended Queries

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • Qualitative insights from user experiences are critical for informing product and policy decisions, but collecting such data at scale is constrained by the time and availability of experts to conduct semi-structured interviews.
  • Recent work has explored using large language models (LLMs) to automate interviewing, yet existing systems lack a principled mechanism for balancing systematic coverage of predefined topics with adaptive exploration, or the ability to pursu
  • In this work, we formulate adaptive semi-structured interviewing as an optimization problem over the interviewer's behavior.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • Based on this formulation, we introduce SparkMe, a multi-agent LLM interviewer that performs deliberative planning via simulated conversation rollouts to select questions with high expected utility.
  • The code, datasets, and evaluation protocols for SparkMe are available as open-source at https://github.com/SALT-NLP/SparkMe.

Researcher Checklist

  • Pass: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    Detected: Expert Verification

  • Pass: Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Pass: Metric reporting is present

    Detected: cost

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.