--- title: User Modeling Agent emoji: πŸ“ colorFrom: green colorTo: red sdk: docker app_port: 7860 pinned: false --- # User Modeling Agent **DSN Γ— BCT LLM Agent Challenge 2026 β€” Task A.** An agent that reads a person into a behavioural *persona*, then writes the star rating and the review that person would leave for an unseen product β€” and critiques and revises its own draft before returning it. > Live demo: https://huggingface.co/spaces/Israelbliz/User-Modeling-Agent > Code: https://huggingface.co/spaces/Israelbliz/User-Modeling-Agent/tree/main --- ## What it does Given a **person** and **product details**, the agent produces: - a **star rating** (1–5) the person would likely give, and - a **written review** in that person's voice β€” tone, length, and quirks matched. It is not a generic review generator. Every output is conditioned on a specific person, and the rating is reasoned, not guessed. ## Three input modes The same persona engine is fed by three input modes: - **Compose a persona** β€” describe the person's reviewing voice in free text. - **Dataset reader** β€” a real user from the data; the agent is scored against a genuinely held-out review. - **Build from past reviews** β€” paste a few of the person's actual past reviews, and the agent builds the persona from them. ## The agentic workflow The system is an agent, not a single prompt. It runs a five-step loop: 1. **Build the persona.** A `PersonaEngine` extracts a structured persona β€” quantitative signals (average rating, rating spread, review length, domains, rating distribution) and a qualitative voice (tone, preferred themes, common complaints, a one-line voice descriptor) distilled by an LLM from sample reviews, with a deterministic fallback if that call fails. 2. **Select grounding history.** For a real person, the agent picks the few past reviews most similar to the target item, so it writes from concrete evidence of how this person actually phrases things. 3. **Generate the rating and review.** A single LLM call, with the rating reasoned in two explicit steps β€” first the persona *prior* (what this person usually gives), then the *item evidence* (what the title and description signal). The final rating is the prior adjusted by the evidence, so a generous reviewer still rates a poor item low and a critical reviewer still rates a strong item high. 4. **Self-reflection β€” critique and revise.** A critic LLM audits the draft for rating–text consistency, voice match, and on-topic fit. If it objects, the agent rewrites with that feedback and re-checks β€” up to two cycles. This act β†’ critique β†’ revise loop is what makes it an agent. 5. **Post-process.** The rating is clamped to range. An optional Nigerian Pidgin rendering layer can restyle the review while preserving meaning, sentiment, and rating. ## Reliability - **Provider failover.** The agent runs a primary and a secondary LLM provider. If the primary fails β€” quota, rate limit or a transient service error β€” the same call is retried automatically on the secondary, so a live demo does not break when one provider is briefly unavailable. - **Graceful degradation.** If an LLM call fails, the agent falls back to a deterministic persona rather than crashing. ## How it maps to the Task A rubric - **Review Text Quality** β€” reviews are grounded in the person's real past reviews and self-critiqued for voice match. - **Rating Accuracy** β€” the two-step prior-plus-evidence rating logic corrects the common failure of predicting from the user average alone. - **Behavioural Fidelity** β€” persona-conditioned generation; the persona portrait is visible in the app for inspection. - **Nigerian contextualization (bonus)** β€” a toggleable Nigerian Pidgin rendering layer; off by default so scored output stays standard English. ## Running locally ```bash pip install -r requirements.txt # set your keys in a .env file: # LLM_PROVIDER=openai # OPENAI_API_KEY=... # GEMINI_API_KEY=... streamlit run app.py ``` `LLM_PROVIDER` sets the primary provider; the other provider, if its key is present, is used as the automatic failover. The processed data (`data/processed/*.parquet`) must be present. ## Project layout ``` core/ shared engine β€” config, llm, persona, reflection, nigerian task_a_user_modeling/ the User Modeling agent scripts/ test harness (test_task_a.py) data/processed/ Amazon Reviews 2023 β€” Books Β· Movies & TV Β· Kindle Store app.py Streamlit demo β€” three input modes ``` ## Configuration Set in a `.env` file (never commit it): - `LLM_PROVIDER` β€” `openai` or `gemini` (the primary provider) - `OPENAI_API_KEY` / `GEMINI_API_KEY` β€” both should be set so the unused one serves as the automatic failover On a HuggingFace Space, set these as **Secrets** in Space settings. ## Notes and honest limitations - The self-reflection critic checks internal consistency; it cannot catch a rating that is wrong but self-consistent. - Rating prediction on hard cases (a critical user who loved something) is improved by the two-step logic but can still be ~0.5–1.0β˜… off. - LLM output is non-deterministic; single-run results vary, so evaluation averages across many users. ## Credits Built for the DSN Γ— BCT LLM Agent Challenge 2026. Author: Israel Akomodesegbe. Team: Winning Team. Dataset: Amazon Reviews 2023.