Human-AI Collaboration

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

Latest papers 429

46 papers in the last four weeks, up 5% on the four weeks before. 0.3% of all new papers.

Apr 30, 2026

To Vibe Research or Not to Vibe Research? Generative AI in Qualitative Research

There has been intense debate among qualitative researchers about whether generative AI is suitable for qualitative research. In this paper, we summarize the broader ongoing discussion of generative AI in qualitative research and its implications for software engineering researchers. The qualitative research approach, small-q (positivist or post-positivist) or Big Q (non-positivist), is among the major criteria for determining whether generative AI can be used in qualitative research. In addition to research philosophy and research approach, skills, ethics, and personal preferences also play a role in researchers' decisions about whether to use AI in qualitative research.

Katja Karhu, Kari Smolander, Jussi Kasurinen

LUT University, Lahti, Finland · LUT University, Lappeenranta, Finland

AI-Assisted Scientific Research Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 30, 2026

Collaborative Agent Reasoning Engineering (CARE): A Three-Party Design Methodology for Systematically Engineering AI Agents with Subject Matter Experts, Developers, and Helper Agents

We present Collaborative Agent Reasoning Engineering (CARE), a disciplined methodology for engineering Large Language Model (LLM) agents in scientific domains. Unlike ad-hoc trial-and-error approaches, CARE specifies behavior, grounding, tool orchestration, and verification through reusable artifacts and systematic, stage-gated phases. The methodology employs a three-party workflow involving Subject-Matter Experts (SMEs), developers, and LLM-based helper agents. These helper agents function as facilitation infrastructure, transforming informal domain intent into structured, reviewable specifications for human approval at defined gates. CARE addresses the "jagged technological frontier", characterized by uneven LLM performance, by bridging the gap between novice and expert analysts regarding domain constraints and verification practices. By generating concrete artifacts, including interaction requirements, reasoning policies, and evaluation criteria, CARE ensures agent behavior is specifiable, testable, and maintainable. Evaluation results from a scientific use case demonstrate that this stage-gated, artifact-driven methodology yields measurable improvements in development efficiency and complex-query performance.

Rahul Ramachandran, Nidhi Jha, Muthukumaran Ramasubramanian

Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama · The University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama

LLM Agents Human-AI Collaboration LLM Agent Reliability

Apr 30, 2026

Leading Across the Spectrum of Human-AI Relationships: A Conceptual Framework for Increasingly Heterogeneous Teams

What shapes a consequential decision when human and artificial intelligence work on it together? The answer is becoming harder to see. A decision may look human-led after AI has set the frame, or appear automated while human judgment still carries decisive force. This paper offers a leadership-facing spectrum to see those relationships within a bounded mandate: Pure Human, Centaur (human-dominant, with AI in the loop), Co-equal, Minotaur (AI-dominant, with humans in the loop), and Pure AI. The spectrum asks where leadership work occurs: who frames the problem, who redirects the work, and who can answer for what follows. The five positions are landmarks that help leaders recognize configurations as they layer, drift, or change in a single decision. The central risk is misrecognition: leaders may keep a human-centered story in place after decision-shaping authority has shifted elsewhere. They may believe oversight remains meaningful when it has become ceremonial, or keep humans in the loop when their involvement could make the decision worse. The framework introduces co-adaptability, the capacity of a configuration to improve as human and non-human participants adjust together, and places it within heterogeneous teaming, where participants may vary by number, substrate, model architecture, capability, speed, memory, and form of participation. The aim is practical: to help strategic leaders and those designing or deploying AI systems recognize the configuration at work, notice when it shifts, and judge whether it fits the decision before them. These configurations will shape how power, responsibility, and trust are distributed in organizational life. Whether the futures they help create remain governable and worth inhabiting will depend on leaders who can see, early enough, where and how consequential decisions are actually being shaped.

Alejandro R. Jadad

Keck Medical School, University of Southern California & Founder, Vivenxia Group, LLC; Los Angeles, California, USA

Human-AI Decision Making Human Oversight of AI Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 28, 2026

People-Centred Medical Image Analysis via Fairness-Aware Human-AI Cooperation

Machine learning models for medical image analysis often exhibit subgroup-dependent performance, which impacts how decisions should be allocated between automated systems and human experts under limited resources. Prior work on AI fairness and human-AI cooperation, including learning to defer (L2D) and learning to complement (L2C), typically addresses these problems in isolation. We propose People-Centred Medical Image Analysis (PecMan), a framework for fairness-aware human-AI co-operative classification that jointly models subgroup-dependent reliability, decision allocation, and collaborative prediction. PecMan combines subgroup-specialised predictors with a gating and consolidation mechanism that dynamically assigns cases to automated models, human experts, or their combination, without requiring sensitive attributes at test time. We also introduce the FairHAI benchmark for evaluating trade-offs between predictive accuracy, subgroup equity, and human involvement. In addition, we provide a theoretical analysis of multi-agent gating via selection regret and characterise fairness-coverage trade-offs under input-dependent allocation. Experiments across multiple medical imaging datasets demonstrate that PecMan achieves consistently improved trade-offs compared to methods that address fairness or human-AI cooperation separately.

Zheng Zhang, Milad Masroor, Cuong Nguyen +6

CVSSP, PAI, University of Surrey, UK · Southampton Solent University, UK · AIML, Adelaide University, Australia +2

Healthcare Learning to Defer Algorithmic Fairness Decision-Focused Learning Medical Image Classification Group Fairness+2

Apr 28, 2026

A paradox of AI fluency

How much does a user's skill with AI shape what AI actually delivers for them? This question is critical for users, AI product builders, and society at large, but it remains underexplored. Using a richly annotated sample of 27K transcripts from WildChat-4.8M, we show that fluent users take on more complex tasks than novices and adopt a fundamentally different interactional mode: they iterate collaboratively with the AI, refining goals and critically assessing outputs, whereas novices take a passive stance. These differences lead to a paradox of AI fluency: fluent users experience more failures than novices -- but their failures tend to be visible (a direct consequence of their engagement), they are more likely to lead to partial recovery, and they occur alongside greater success on complex tasks. Novices, by contrast, more often experience invisible failures: conversations that appear to end successfully but in fact miss the mark. Taken together, these results reframe what success with AI depends on. Individuals should adopt a stance of active engagement rather than passive acceptance. AI product builders should recognize that they are designing not just model behavior but user behavior; encouraging deep engagement, rather than friction-free experiences, will lead to more success overall. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/bigspinai/bigspin-fluency-outcomes

Christopher Potts, Moritz Sudhof

Bigspin AI · Stanford University

Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 28, 2026

Emotive Architectures: The Role of LLMs in Adjusting Work Environments

In remote and hybrid work contexts, the integration of physical and digital environments is revolutionizing spatial experiences, collaboration, and interpersonal interactions. This study examines three fundamental spatial conditions: the physical environment, characterized by material and sensory attributes; the virtual environment, influenced by immersive technologies; and their fusion into hybrid environments where digital and physical components interact dynamically. The increasing number of AI tools in contemporary society, extensively utilized in both professional and personal spheres, has led to a varied landscape of developing technologies. For instance, ChatGPT has emerged as one of the most downloaded applications, a statistically substantiated fact that demonstrates the swift incorporation of language-based AI into daily life. It also underscores the function of large language models (LLMs) as meaningful bridges between concepts at reading emotional and behavioral signals via natural language. These models provide real-time modifications such as altering illumination, acoustics, or interface configurations, converting static settings into dynamic, emotionally receptive environments. We investigate the integration of language models into professional settings and their potential to enhance user experience by promoting focus, well-being, and engagement. The study investigates ethical concerns, including privacy, emotional tracking, and user agency, emphasizing the importance of inclusive and transparent design. This research formulates a framework for creating co-adaptive environments that merge technological innovation with human-centered experiences, offering a fresh viewpoint on responsive and supportive hybrid workspaces.

Lara Vartziotis, Tina Vartziotis, Frank Beutenmueller +4

National Technical University of Athens, Greece · TWT GmbH Science & Innovation, Stuttgart, Germany · Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge USA

Human-Centered AI Human-AI Collaboration Affective Computing

Apr 28, 2026

Tracing GenAI Literacy: Uncovering Student-AI Interaction Patterns in Academic Writing through Epistemic Network Analysis

As Generative AI (GenAI) becomes integral to education, fostering GenAI literacy is critical. However, current assessments largely rely on self-reported scales, lacking insights into how literacy manifests in actual learning processes. This study leverages Learning Analytics (LA) to bridge this gap. We collected interaction logs from 162 university students engaged in a GenAI-assisted abstract writing task. Using Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA), we modeled and compared the questioning strategies of students with varying GenAI literacy levels. Preliminary results reveal distinct interaction signatures: high-literacy students engage in iterative refinement and strategic questioning, while low-literacy students rely on direct generation commands. This work contributes to the workshop by demonstrating how process data can characterize GenAI literacy, paving the way for data-driven literacy assessment and real-time interventions.

Angxuan Chen, Jiyou Jia

Department of Educational Technology, Graduate School of Education, Peking University, Beijing, China

Educational Data Mining Generative AI in Education Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 27, 2026

Leverage Laws: A Per-Task Framework for Human-Agent Collaboration

We propose a per-task leverage ratio for human-agent collaboration: human work displaced by an agent, divided by the human time required to specify the task, resolve mid-run interrupts, and review the result. The denominator decomposes into three channels through which a conserved per-task information requirement must flow, each with its own time-cost scalar. We show that information density itself is directional and bounded by separate ceilings on human-to-agent and agent-to-human flow, and that the asymptotic behavior of leverage decomposes into two scaling axes (capability and memory) with a non-zero floor on the planning term set by irreducible task novelty bounded by human throughput. We extend this per-task analysis to a windowed leverage measure that accommodates recurring tasks, spawned subtasks, and amortized system-design investment. The per-task ceiling does not bind the windowed measure, though both remain bounded:

L_{\text{task}}

by per-task novelty,

L_{\text{window}}

by the stock of accumulated planning investment that pays out within the window. The framework operationalizes aspects of earlier qualitative work on supervisory control (Sheridan, 1992), common ground (Clark & Brennan, 1991), and mixed-initiative interaction (Horvitz, 1999) within a single normative ratio, and produces a list of testable empirical questions that we leave as open problems.

Stan Loosmore

Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration AI and Labor

Apr 27, 2026

Measuring Successful Cooperation in Human-AI Teamwork: Development and Validation of the Perceived Cooperativity and Teaming Perception Scales

As human-AI cooperation becomes increasingly prevalent, reliable instruments for assessing the subjective quality of cooperative human-AI interaction are needed. We introduce two theoretically grounded scales: the Perceived Cooperativity Scale (PCS), grounded in joint activity theory, and the Teaming Perception Scale (TPS), grounded in evolutionary cooperation theory. The PCS captures an agent's perceived cooperative capability and practice within a single interaction sequence; the TPS captures the emergent sense of teaming arising from mutual contribution and support. Both scales were adapted for human-human cooperation to enable cross-agent comparisons. Across three studies (N = 409) encompassing a cooperative card game, LLM interaction, and a decision-support system, analyses of dimensionality, reliability, and validity indicated that both scales successfully differentiated between cooperation partners of varying cooperative quality and showed construct validity in line with expectations. The scales provide a basis for empirical investigation and system evaluation across a wide range of human-AI cooperation contexts.

Christiane Attig, Christiane Wiebel-Herboth, Patricia Wollstadt +3

Honda Research Institute Europe GmbH, Offenbach am Main, Germany · Institute of Human-Centered Interactive Systems, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany

Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 27, 2026

Can You Make It Sound Like You? Post-Editing LLM-Generated Text for Personal Style

Despite the growing use of large language models (LLMs) for writing tasks, users may hesitate to rely on LLMs when personal style is important. Post-editing LLM-generated drafts or translations is a common collaborative writing strategy, but it remains unclear whether users can effectively reshape LLM-generated text to reflect their personal style. We conduct a pre-registered online study (

n=81

) in which participants post-edit LLM-generated drafts for writing tasks where personal style matters to them. Using embedding-based style similarity metrics, we find that post-editing increases stylistic similarity to participants' unassisted writing and reduces similarity to fully LLM-generated output. However, post-edited text still remains stylistically closer in style to LLM text than to participants' unassisted control text, and it exhibits reduced stylistic diversity compared to unassisted human text. We find a gap between perceived stylistic authenticity and model-measured stylistic similarity, with post-edited text often perceived as representative of participants' personal style despite remaining detectable LLM stylistic traces.

Connor Baumler, Calvin Bao, Huy Nghiem +3

University of Maryland

LLM Evaluation Controllable Text Generation Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 25, 2026

Can Humans Detect AI? Mining Textual Signals of AI-Assisted Writing Under Varying Scrutiny Conditions

This study asks whether the threat of AI detection changes how people write with AI, and whether other people can tell the difference. In a two-phase controlled experiment, 21 participants wrote opinion pieces on remote work using an AI chatbot. Half were randomly warned that their submission would be scanned by an AI detection tool. The other half received no warning. Both groups had access to the same chatbot. In Phase 2, 251 independent judges evaluated 1,999 paired comparisons, each time choosing which document in the pair was written by a human. Judges were not told that both writers had access to AI. Across all evaluations, judges selected the warned writer's document as human 54.13% of the time versus 45.87% for the unwarned writer. A two-sided binomial test rejects chance guessing at p = 0.000243, and the result holds across both writing stances. Yet on every measurable text feature extracted, including AI overlap scores, lexical diversity, sentence structure, and pronoun usage, the two groups were indistinguishable. The judges are picking up on something that feature-based methods do not capture.

Daniel Tabach

Georgia Institute of Technology

AI-Generated Text Detection Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 23, 2026

Envisioning Sensemaking in Multi-Human, Multi-Agent Collaborative Knowledge Work

Sensemaking is central to knowledge work, where people search, evaluate, interpret, and use information over time to construct durable understanding. The rise of generative AI has begun to reshape this process: GenAI systems now perform interpretive functions such as summarization, synthesis, and thematic grouping that knowledge workers have traditionally carried out themselves. In collaborative settings, these shifts compound, complicating how teams divide interpretive labor, trust one another's contributions, and negotiate shared understanding. In this position paper, we examine how GenAI reshapes sensemaking in collaborative knowledge work and propose five design principles for multi-human, multi-agent collaborative sensemaking: dynamic multi-layer information representations, active identification and bridging of gaps in understanding, critical engagement with information, verifiability, and accountability. Building on these principles, we introduce a conceptual framework for a dynamic shared representational workspace in which knowledge workers and specialized AI agents jointly gather evidence, schematize, hypothesize, and pursue collaborative goals. Through a partner agent, a shared space agent, and an orchestrator agent, the framework preserves the provenance and authorship of contributions and traces the evolution of both individual and shared interpretations, supporting coherent, negotiated knowledge construction that current generative AI systems tend to obscure.

Zhitong Guan, Soo Young Rieh

The University of Texas at Austin · Austin, Texas, USA

Multi-Agent Collaboration Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 23, 2026

A systematic review of generative AI usage for IT project management

This paper aims to synthesize current knowledge on generative AI in IT project management using the PRISMA methodology to provide researchers with a comprehensive perspective on techniques, applications, adoption trends, limitations, and integration across project management tools and process groups. The analysis reveals a clear dominance of OpenAI's GPT in the included studies but relying primarily on prompt engineering, suggesting that research in this area remains at an exploratory stage. Finally, it identifies and discusses three promising research directions for AI-enabled project management, including process group-specific AI agents, project role-based AI agents, and hybrid collaborative networks that enable human-guided orchestration.

Ionut Anghel, Tudor Cioara

Computer Science Department, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca,Cluj-Napoca, Romania

Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 22, 2026

SWE-chat: Coding Agent Interactions From Real Users in the Wild

AI coding agents are being adopted at scale, yet we lack empirical evidence on how people actually use them and how much of their output is useful in practice. We present SWE-chat, the first large-scale dataset of real coding agent sessions collected from open-source developers in the wild. The dataset currently contains almost 18,000 sessions, comprising more than 229,000 user prompts and 2 million agent tool calls. SWE-chat is a living dataset; our collection pipeline automatically and continually discovers and processes sessions from public repositories. Leveraging SWE-chat, we provide an initial empirical characterization of real-world coding agent usage and failure modes. We find that coding patterns are bimodal: in 41% of sessions, agents author virtually all committed code ("vibe coding"), while in 25%, humans write all code themselves. Despite rapidly improving capabilities, coding agents remain inefficient in natural settings. Only 59% of all agent-produced code survives into user commits, and agent-written code introduces more security vulnerabilities than code authored by humans. Furthermore, users push back against agent outputs - through corrections, failure reports, and interruptions - in 50% of all turns. By capturing complete interaction traces with human vs. agent code authorship attribution, SWE-chat provides an empirical foundation for moving beyond curated benchmarks towards an evidence-based understanding of how AI agents perform in real developer workflows.

Joachim Baumann, Vishakh Padmakumar, Xiang Li +3

Stanford University

Coding Agents Human-AI Collaboration LLM Agent Reliability

Apr 22, 2026

Auditing and Controlling AI Agent Actions in Spreadsheets

Advances in AI agent capabilities have outpaced users' ability to meaningfully oversee their execution. AI agents can perform sophisticated, multi-step knowledge work autonomously from start to finish, yet this process remains effectively inaccessible during execution, often buried within large volumes of intermediate reasoning and outputs: by the time users receive the output, all underlying decisions have already been made without their involvement. This lack of transparency leaves users unable to examine the agent's assumptions, identify errors before they propagate, or redirect execution when it deviates from their intent. The stakes are particularly high in spreadsheet environments, where process and artifact are inseparable. Each decision the agent makes is recorded directly in cells that belong to and reflect on the user. We introduce Pista, a spreadsheet AI agent that decomposes execution into auditable, controllable actions, providing users with visibility into the agent's decision-making process and the capacity to intervene at each step. A formative study (N = 8) and a within-subjects summative evaluation (N = 16) comparing Pista to a baseline agent demonstrated that active participation in execution influenced not only task outcomes but also users' comprehension of the task, their perception of the agent, and their sense of role within the workflow. Users identified their own intent reflected in the agent's actions, detected errors that post-hoc review would have failed to surface, and reported a sense of co-ownership over the resulting output. These findings indicate that meaningful human oversight of AI agents in knowledge work requires not improved post-hoc review mechanisms, but active participation in decisions as they are made.

Sadra Sabouri, Zeinabsadat Saghi, Run Huang +4

University of Southern California Los Angeles, USA · California State Polytechnic University Pomona, USA · Microsoft Redmond, USA

Human-in-the-Loop AI AI Agent Monitoring Human Oversight of AI Spreadsheet Automation Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 21, 2026

Semantic Prompting: Agentic Incremental Narrative Refinement through Spatial Semantic Interaction

Interactive spatial layouts empower users to synthesize information and organize findings for sensemaking. While Large Language Models (LLMs) can automate narrative generation from spatial layouts, current collage-based and re-generation methods struggle to support the incremental spatial refinements inherent to the sensemaking process. We identify three critical gaps in existing spatial-textual generation: interaction-revision misalignment, human-LLM intent misalignment, and lack of granular customization. To address these, we introduce Semantic Prompting, a framework for spatial refinement that perceives semantic interactions, reasons about refinement intent, and performs targeted positional revisions. We implemented S-PRISM to realize this framework. The empirical evaluation demonstrated that S-PRISM effectively enhanced the precision of interaction-revision refinement. A user study (

N=14

) highlighted how participants leveraged S-PRISM for incremental formalization through interactive steering. Results showed that users valued its efficient, adaptable, and trustworthy support, which effectively strengthens human-LLM intent alignment.

Xuxin Tang, Ibrahim Tahmid, Eric Krokos +3

Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA, United States · Department of Defense United States

Grounded Text Generation Language Model Steering Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 21, 2026

TeamFusion: Supporting Open-ended Teamwork with Multi-Agent Systems

In open-ended domains, teams must reconcile diverse viewpoints to produce strong deliverables. Answer aggregation approaches commonly used in closed domains are ill-suited to this setting, as they tend to suppress minority perspectives rather than resolve underlying disagreements. We present TeamFusion, a multi-agent system designed to support teamwork in open-ended domains by: 1. Instantiating a proxy agent for each team member conditioned on their expressed preferences; 2. Conducting a structured discussion to surface agreements and disagreements; and 3. Synthesizing more consensus-oriented deliverables that feed into new iterations of discussion and refinement. We evaluate TeamFusion on two teamwork tasks where team members can assess how well their individual views are represented in team decisions and how consensually strong the final deliverables are, finding that it outperforms direct aggregation baselines across metrics, tasks, and team configurations.

Jiale Liu, Victor S. Bursztyn, Lin Ai +4

Pennsylvania State University · Adobe Research · Columbia University +1

Multi-Agent Coordination Multi-Agent Collaboration Multi-Agent Consensus Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 21, 2026

HarDBench: A Benchmark for Draft-Based Co-Authoring Jailbreak Attacks for Safe Human-LLM Collaborative Writing

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as co-authors in collaborative writing, where users begin with rough drafts and rely on LLMs to complete, revise, and refine their content. However, this capability poses a serious safety risk: malicious users could jailbreak the models-filling incomplete drafts with dangerous content-to force them into generating harmful outputs. In this paper, we identify the vulnerability of current LLMs to such draft-based co-authoring jailbreak attacks and introduce HarDBench, a systematic benchmark designed to evaluate the robustness of LLMs against this emerging threat. HarDBench spans a range of high-risk domains-including Explosives, Drugs, Weapons, and Cyberattacks-and features prompts with realistic structure and domain-specific cues to assess the model susceptibility to harmful completions. To mitigate this risk, we introduce a safety-utility balanced alignment approach based on preference optimization, training models to refuse harmful completions while remaining helpful on benign drafts. Experimental results show that existing LLMs are highly vulnerable in co-authoring contexts and our alignment method significantly reduces harmful outputs without degrading performance on co-authoring capabilities. This presents a new paradigm for evaluating and aligning LLMs in human-LLM collaborative writing settings. Our new benchmark and dataset are available on our project page at https://github.com/untae0122/HarDBench

Euntae Kim, Soomin Han, Buru Chang

Korea University · Sogang University

LLM Safety Benchmarks Language Model Safety Evaluation LLM Safety Alignment LLM Jailbreak Attacks Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 21, 2026

ClawNet: Human-Symbiotic Agent Network for Cross-User Autonomous Cooperation

Current AI agent frameworks have made remarkable progress in automating individual tasks, yet all existing systems serve a single user. Human productivity rests on the social and organizational relationships through which people coordinate, negotiate, and delegate. When agents move beyond performing tasks for one person to representing that person in collaboration with others, the infrastructure for cross-user agent collaboration is entirely absent, let alone the governance mechanisms needed to secure it. We argue that the next frontier for AI agents lies not in stronger individual capability, but in the digitization of human collaborative relationships. To this end, we propose a human-symbiotic agent paradigm. Each user owns a permanently bound agent system that collaborates on the owner's behalf, forming a network whose nodes are humans rather than agents. This paradigm rests on three governance primitives. A layered identity architecture separates a Manager Agent from multiple context-specific Identity Agents; the Manager Agent holds global knowledge but is architecturally isolated from external communication. Scoped authorization enforces per-identity access control and escalates boundary violations to the owner. Action-level accountability logs every operation against its owner's identity and authorization, ensuring full auditability. We instantiate this paradigm in ClawNet, an identity-governed agent collaboration framework that enforces identity binding and authorization verification through a central orchestrator, enabling multiple users to collaborate securely through their respective agents.

Zhiqin Yang, Zhenyuan Zhang, Xianzhang Jia +4

Hong Kong Generative AI Research & Development Center · Hong Kong University of Science and Technology · Hong Kong Baptist University

Multi-Agent Collaboration AI Agent Governance Access Control Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 20, 2026

Choose Your Own Adventure: Non-Linear AI-Assisted Programming with EvoGraph

Current AI-assisted programming tools are predominantly linear and chat-based, which deviates from the iterative and branching nature of programming itself. Our preliminary study with developers using AI assistants suggested that they often struggle to explore alternatives, manage prompting sequences, and trace changes. Informed by these insights, we created EvoGraph, an IDE plugin that integrates AI interactions and code changes as a lightweight and interactive development graph. EvoGraph automatically records a branching AI-assisted coding history and allows developers to manipulate the graph to compare, merge, and revisit prior collaborative AI programming states. Our user study with 20 participants revealed that EvoGraph addressed developers' challenges identified in our preliminary study while imposing lower cognitive load. Participants also found the graph-based representation supported safe exploration, efficient iteration, and reflection on AI-generated changes. Our work highlights design opportunities for tools to help developers make sense of and act on their problem-solving progress in the emerging AI-mediated programming context.

Vassilios Exarhakos, Jinghui Cheng, Jin L. C. Guo

McGill University Montreal, Quebec, Canada · Polytechnique Montreal Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration AI-Assisted Software Development

Apr 20, 2026

Human-Machine Co-Boosted Bug Report Identification with Mutualistic Neural Active Learning

Bug reports, encompassing a wide range of bug types, are crucial for maintaining software quality. However, the increasing complexity and volume of bug reports pose a significant challenge in sole manual identification and assignment to the appropriate teams for resolution, as dealing with all the reports is time-consuming and resource-intensive. In this paper, we introduce a cross-project framework, dubbed Mutualistic Neural Active Learning (MNAL), designed for automated and more effective identification of bug reports from GitHub repositories boosted by human-machine collaboration. MNAL utilizes a neural language model that learns and generalizes reports across different projects, coupled with active learning to form neural active learning. A distinctive feature of MNAL is the purposely crafted mutualistic relation between the machine learners (neural language model) and human labelers (developers) when enriching the knowledge learned. That is, the most informative human-labeled reports and their corresponding pseudo-labeled ones are used to update the model while those reports that need to be labeled by developers are more readable and identifiable, thereby enhancing the human-machine teaming therein. We evaluate MNAL using a large scale dataset against the SOTA approaches, baselines, and different variants. The results indicate that MNAL achieves up to 95.8% and 196.0% effort reduction in terms of readability and identifiability during human labeling, respectively, while resulting in a better performance in bug report identification. Additionally, our MNAL is model-agnostic since it is capable of improving the model performance with various underlying neural language models. To further verify the efficacy of our approach, we conducted a qualitative case study involving 10 human participants, who rate MNAL as being more effective while saving more time and monetary resources.

Guoming Long, Shihai Wang, Hui Fang +1

University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China · Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom · IDEAS Lab, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom

Human-in-the-Loop Annotation Active Learning Text Classification Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 20, 2026

The Triadic Loop: A Framework for Negotiating Alignment in AI Co-hosted Livestreaming

AI systems are increasingly embedded in multi-user social environments, yet most alignment frameworks conceptualize interaction as a dyadic relationship between a single user and an AI system. Livestreaming platforms challenge this assumption: interaction unfolds among streamers and audiences in real time, producing dynamic affective and social feedback loops. In this paper, we introduce the Triadic Loop, a conceptual framework that reconceptualizes alignment in AI co-hosted livestreaming as a temporally reinforced process of bidirectional adaptation among three actors: streamer

\leftrightarrow

AI co-host, AI co-host

\leftrightarrow

audience, and streamer

\leftrightarrow

audience. Unlike instruction-following paradigms, bidirectional alignment requires each actor to continuously reshape the others, meaning misalignment in any sub-loop can destabilize the broader system. Drawing on literature from multi-party interaction, collaborative AI, and relational agents, we articulate how AI co-hosts function not only as mediators but as performative participants and community members shaping collective meaning-making. We further propose "strategic misalignment" as a mechanism for sustaining community engagement and introduce three relational evaluation constructs grounded in established instruments. The framework contributes a model of dynamic multi-party alignment, an account of cross-loop reinforcement, and design implications for AI co-hosts that sustain social coherence in participatory media environments.

Katherine Wang, Nadia Berthouze, Aneesha Singh

University College London London, United Kingdom

AI Alignment Pluralistic Alignment Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 20, 2026

The Collaboration Gap in Human-AI Work

LLMs are increasingly presented as collaborators in programming, design, writing, and analysis. Yet the practical experience of working with them often falls short of this promise. In many settings, users must diagnose misunderstandings, reconstruct missing assumptions, and repeatedly repair misaligned responses. This poster introduces a conceptual framework for understanding why such collaboration remains fragile. Drawing on a constructivist grounded theory analysis of 16 interviews with designers, developers, and applied AI practitioners working on LLM-enabled systems, and informed by literature on human-AI collaboration, we argue that stable collaboration depends not only on model capability but on the interaction's grounding conditions. We distinguish three recurrent structures of human-AI work: one-shot assistance, weak collaboration with asymmetric repair, and grounded collaboration. We propose that collaboration breaks down when the appearance of partnership outpaces the grounding capacity of the interaction and contribute a framework for discussing grounding, repair, and interaction structure in LLM-enabled work.

Varad Vishwarupe, Marina Jirotka, Nigel Shadbolt +1

University of Oxford, United Kingdom

LLM Grounding Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 20, 2026

Scaling Human-AI Coding Collaboration Requires a Governable Consensus Layer

Vibe coding turns natural-language intent into working software, but code generation alone does not give humans and agents a shared account of what they are building. As collaboration spans participants, components, and releases, design choices must remain understandable and open to revision. We argue that scaling human and AI coding collaboration requires a governable consensus layer. Agentic Consensus organizes collaboration around a versioned project-state model linking selected intent, structural commitments, executable artifacts, and evidence. Participants can clarify intent before implementation and coordinate proposed changes against commitments that humans can inspect and revise. Bidirectional synchronization connects intended changes to implementation and exposes conflicts or stale evidence as artifacts evolve. We implemented its review workflow in Consensus Control. In a small exploratory human study, 10 participants used the system on projects from their everyday work and reported clearer, faster understanding of agent-submitted changes. A three-condition comparison with the same participants collected 60 responses, with near-ceiling decision scores and measured representation and pipeline costs. Our research agenda asks how shared project state can preserve human understanding and control as agent contributions accumulate.

Tianfu Wang, Zhezheng Hao, Yin Wu +7

HKUST (GZ) Guangzhou, China · ZJU Hangzhou, China · USTC Hefei, China +1

AI Agent Benchmarks AI Agent Governance Knowledge Graphs Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 20, 2026

CollabSkill: Evaluating Human-Agent Collaboration On Real-World Tasks

AI agents are reshaping the workspace, leading to drastic change of how humans work. Despite the considerable potential of human-agent collaboration both in preserving human agency and generating economic value, this paradigm remains largely absent from occupational task evaluation, hindered by the difficulty of gathering real human data and accounting for inter-human variability. We introduce CollabSkill, a framework for evaluating human-agent collaboration on real-world occupational tasks. CollabSkill pairs real human workers with AI agents on tasks matched to their occupational background, collecting data that capture the complexity of economically valuable tasks and the usage patterns of real workers. To account for inter-human variability, CollabSkill employs a Bayesian skill rating system to disentangle and quantify the skill contributions of both humans and AI agents. Drawing on over 1,500 prompts from 386 working sessions contributed by 93 human workers, our analysis yields insights on two fronts: on the agent side, rankings on CollabSkill diverge meaningfully from those of existing fully autonomous benchmarks where Codex leads, with Claude Code ranking first; on the human side, CollabSkill reveals that practical experience emerges as the primary driver of collaboration skill, with hands-on collaboration meaningfully shifting workers' AI literacy. Together, we hope CollabSkill enables the community to invest in systematic evaluation of human-agent collaboration and spurs development efforts aimed at building AI agents that genuinely augment human workers.

Yijia Shao, Zora Zhiruo Wang, Neel Ahuja +3

Stanford University · Carnegie Mellon University · University of Rochester +1

AI Agent Evaluation Human-in-the-Loop Evaluation Human-AI Collaboration AI and Labor

Apr 19, 2026

Human-AI Collaboration for Estimating Scientific Replicability

Determining whether published scientific findings can successfully be replicated is a long-standing challenge in the empirical sciences. Existing approaches for replicability assessment typically rely either on human judgment, i.e., creative assembly of human experts, or on machine learning models trained on paper content metadata. While both approaches have demonstrated value, each also has important limitations. Human forecasts can be influenced by cognitive biases and narrow exposure to the research literature, while automated assessments often struggle to capture contextual cues and subtle signals of credibility. In this paper, we examine a hybrid approach. Specifically, we introduce a hybrid prediction market in which algorithmic agents trade alongside human participants to jointly estimate the likelihood that a published scientific finding will be corroborated via the outcome of a controlled replication study. Agents are trained on outcomes from hundreds of prior replication studies while human participants contribute domain knowledge through real-time trading. We evaluate this hybrid approach through multiple live experiments involving participants from different academic disciplines and compare its performance to artificial-only and human-only baselines. Our results show that, except for a few cases, hybrid markets match or outperform artificial prediction markets, producing more accurate and reliable replication forecasts.

Tatiana Chakravorti, Robert Fraleigh, Timothy Fritton +7

The Pennsylvania State University · Rutgers University

Probabilistic Forecasting Scientific Reproducibility Human-AI Collaboration Prediction Markets

Apr 19, 2026

Agentic Social Affordance Framework (ASAF): Agent Identity Design as a Collaboration Interface in Multi-Agent Systems

As AI systems evolve from single agents to multi-agent architectures, a critical design dimension has been overlooked: how the social identity of individual agents shapes human behavior within the collaboration. This paper introduces the Agentic Social Affordance Framework (ASAF), a theoretical framework extending Social Affordance theory to multi-agent AI systems. We propose that agent identity design functions as a collaboration interface--structuring how users perceive and engage with each agent, and thereby influencing Human-Agent collaboration outcomes. ASAF adopts the analytical separability of the social affordance layer and the engineering orchestration layer as a framing assumption--an organizing distinction that structures design analysis--rather than a testable claim about effect-independence. ASAF comprises three mechanisms: Identity Signaling, Behavioral Priming, and Collaborative Governance, and specifies their boundary conditions through a four-tier Identity Signal Fidelity Spectrum and an individual-difference moderating variable (anthropomorphizing vs. instrumentalizing cognitive style). We situate ASAF relative to affordance theory (Hutchby, 2001), the CASA paradigm (Gambino et al., 2020), and classical multi-agent systems research (Wooldridge & Jennings, 1995), identifying a directional reversal: where classical MAS used roles, norms, and coordination to constrain autonomous agents, ASAF applies the same organizational vocabulary to structure the cognition and oversight of human operators who remain in the loop. ASAF positions social affordance design as a first-class design responsibility that engineering orchestration cannot subsume. We outline directions for empirical validation, including a factorial design characterizing the empirical interaction surface between the social affordance and engineering orchestration layers.

Meng-Han Lee

Independent Researcher, Taipei, Taiwan

Multi-Agent Collaboration Human-AI Interaction Multi-Agent Systems Human-AI Collaboration Agentic AI

Apr 18, 2026

From Clinical Intent to Clinical Model: Autonomous Coding-Agents for Clinician-driven AI Development

Developing AI models that are useful in clinical practice, requires efficient collaboration between clinicians and AI developers. This poses a practical challenge: clinicians must repeatedly communicate and refine their requirements with AI developers before those requirements can be translated into executable model development. This iterative process is time-consuming, and even after repeated discussion, misalignment may still exist because the two sides do not fully share each other's expertise. Coding agents may help close this gap. They can write and refine code on their own, and they carry working knowledge of both medicine and AI to understand commands formulated by both medical experts and developers. We present a prototype that lets clinicians drive AI development directly. A clinician describes the task in plain language, and the system turns the description into a working pipeline, refines it through repeated experiments together with the clinician, and returns a model that meets the stated clinical objective. Across five clinical tasks, the system reliably produces models that matched the clinician's request and reached competitive performance. Most notably, on chest radiographs the system sharply reduced the model's reliance on chest drains, a well-known shortcut for pneumothorax classification, from 60% to 31% on one dataset and from 50% to 18% on another. Our results suggest that coding agents can shift clinical AI development toward a more clinician-driven mode, allowing domain experts to shape models directly instead of relaying requirements through specialized AI teams.

Zihao Zhao, Frederik Hauke, Juliana De Castilhos +4

University Hospital Aachen, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, 52074 Aachen, Germany · Juelich AI Factory, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany · Else Kröner Fresenius Center for Digital Health, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany +2

AI Coding Agents Agentic Code Generation Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 18, 2026

The Instrumental Dissolution of Typing: Why AI Challenges the Keyboard Era in Knowledge Work

For four decades, the QWERTY keyboard organized white-collar knowledge work. Typing's dominance was instrumental, not cognitively necessary. As multimodal AI achieves human-parity understanding of speech and gesture, this necessity dissolves. We introduce instrumental dissolution -- loss of institutional-default status while persisting in specialist niches. The keyboard era ends not through hardware replacement but through migration of its function into AI systems. The central contribution identifies the verification bottleneck: as AI collapses production friction, the primary constraint shifts from generation to evaluation. Knowledge workers become adversarial auditors rather than keystroke-producers. This restructures professional expertise, organizational communication, and how productive labor is recognized. Converging evidence from history, philosophy, neuroscience, technology, organizational studies, and cultural analysis supports this thesis. We map synthetic literacy -- oral input generating literate output -- as the defining feature of this transition. Under three scenarios (optimistic: 2028-2035; base: 2035-2045; pessimistic: 2045-2060), we specify disconfirmation criteria that would weaken the thesis if observed. We propose seven interface primitives operationalizing verification-centered HCI.

Wei Roy Hua

8T5 Innovations

Human-AI Interaction Human Oversight of AI Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 17, 2026

The impact of postediting on AI generative translation in Yemeni context: Translating literary prose by ChatGPT

This study examines the role of artificial intelligence in translation, focusing on ChatGPT, specifically ChatGPT-4, and the extent to which human postediting is required in literary translation. A mixed-method approach was adopted, involving 30 professional translators who evaluated and postedited AI-generated translations of selected Arabic and English literary texts. The results show that although AI improves translation speed and accessibility, it remains limited in handling cultural, stylistic, and figurative aspects of language. Participants generally confirmed the necessity of human postediting, particularly in novels and drama. The findings indicate that emerging human-machine collaboration model rather than replacement of human translators. The study concludes that AI should be used as a supportive tool, while human expertise remains essential for ensuring translation quality and cultural appropriateness.

Nasim Al-wagieh, Mohammed Q. Shormani

Ibb University

Human-AI Collaboration Machine Translation MT Evaluation