Clarification Is Not Enough: Post-Clarification Answering Remains the Bottleneck in Multi-Turn QA

Pluralistic alignment requires systems to adapt to diverse user values, communication styles, and contextual assumptions. We believe that a foundational prerequisite for such alignment enabling accurate preference elicitation from people when their intent is under-specified or ambiguous. We study the problem of preference elicitation in multi-turn question answering by decomposing the problem into two components: a $\mathbf{\text{clarification}}\mathbf{\text{policy}}$, which decides whether to ask a clarifying question or answer directly, and $\mathbf{\text{post-clarification}}\mathbf{\text{answering}}$, which produces the correct final answer once the missing information is provided. We show, using the PACIFIC benchmark, that supervised fine-tuning rapidly improves the clarification policy, however, final answer accuracy remains substantially lower even when the model takes the correct action. This gap indicates that understanding and correctly interpreting the user’s response is the critical gap in multi-turn question-answering systems.