Conversational Capture: A Trajectory-Level Framework for Evaluating Generative Engine Optimization in Multi-turn Human-Agent Interaction
Junwei YuJieyu ZhouMufeng YangYepeng DingHiroyuki Sato
Oct 2026
Human-computer Interaction
Abstract
Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) shapes content to increase its likelihood of being cited by answer engines built on retrieval-augmented large language models. GEO is typically evaluated as a single-turn property: for a fixed query, an evaluator measures a source's visibility in one answer. We argue that the single answer is an inadequate unit of analysis. Human-agent information seeking forms a closed loop: the agent's answer changes the user's beliefs and therefore the next question, which in turn determines what the agent retrieves. We introduce conversational capture, a phenomenon in which a source cited early becomes substantially more likely to be cited again. Capture operates through a machine-side channel, history-conditioned retrieval, and a human-side channel, follow-up questions directed toward the captured source. We formalize the interaction as a two-layer closed-loop system and derive trajectory-level constructs: cumulative conversational visibility; a direct/feedback decomposition of trajectory gain; a nested split of the feedback term into machine-side and human-side channels; a capture coefficient; a compounding ratio; and a misranking diagnostic. Using reinforcement-process (P\'olya-urn) theory, we prove that the feedback term is zero under single-turn evaluation and that GEO's cumulative payoff grows superlinearly with conversation length while capture develops. A model-derived illustration shows that the feedback term can exceed the direct term, the compounding ratio exceeds two within ten turns, and single-turn and trajectory rankings agree only weakly (Kendall's $\tau = 0.4$). We connect the human channel to information foraging, trust calibration, and Bayesian persuasion, and discuss design implications for answer engines.
This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.
P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al.· arXiv.org· 727 citations· ⚡54
The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.
M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al.· Empirical Software Engineeri...· 401 citations· ⚡48
The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.
Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· Information and Software Tec...· 394 citations· ⚡54
The perception of the impact of agile methods is predominantly positive, and several challenge areas were discovered, but based on this study, agile methods are here to stay.
M. Laanti, O. Salo, P. Abrahamsson· Information and Software Tec...· 260 citations· ⚡20
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 7, 2026
Students in MIT’s Concourse program delve deeply into the human condition, debate challenging questions, and learn to develop judgment about issues that can’t be quantified.
Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity. The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduSep 30, 2026
Able to defeat top-ranked human players and more efficient than other models, the new system could help decision-makers in military maneuvers or business negotiations.