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 3, 2026

The Augmentation Trap: AI Productivity and the Cost of Cognitive Offloading

Experimental evidence suggests that AI tools raise worker productivity, but also that sustained offloading can erode expertise. This creates a tradeoff when expertise is a complement to AI. To explore the consequences of this tradeoff, we develop a dynamic model in which a decision-maker chooses the intensity of practice-displacing AI offloading for a worker over time, trading immediate productivity against the erosion of worker skill. We decompose the tool's productivity effect into two components, one independent of worker expertise and one that scales with it. The model produces three main results. First, a decision-maker who fully anticipates skill erosion still rationally adopts AI when front-loaded gains outweigh long-run skill costs, lowering long-run productivity. The decomposition sorts deployments into five regions by their long-run effect, separating beneficial from harmful adoption. Second, the tradeoff introduces the potential for misaligned incentives to harm workers. When managers are short-termist or worker skill has external value, AI use can leave the worker worse off than with no AI, the outcome we call the augmentation trap. Third, when AI substitutes strongly enough for expertise, offloading can generate permanent divergence, with high-skill workers realizing their potential and low-skill workers deskilling. Small differences in managerial incentives can determine which path a worker takes.

Michael Caosun, Sinan Aral

Human-AI Collaboration AI and Labor Cognitive Offloading

Apr 2, 2026

Generative AI Use in Entrepreneurship: An Integrative Review and an Empowerment-Entrapment Framework

Despite the growing use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in entrepreneurship, research on its impact remains fragmented. To address this limitation, we provide an integrative, entrepreneur-centered review of how GenAI influences entrepreneurs at each stage of the entrepreneurial process: (1) opportunity recognition and ideation, (2) opportunity evaluation and commitment, (3) resource assembly and mobilization, and (4) venture launch and growth. Based on our review, we propose the Empowerment-Entrapment Framework, which not only catalogs GenAI's benefits and costs throughout the entrepreneurial process, but also identifies potential trade-offs underlying GenAI's double-edged role. For example, GenAI may improve venture idea quality yet produce hallucinations and biases; boost entrepreneurial self-efficacy yet heighten overconfidence; increase functional breadth and self-sufficiency yet reduce prosociality; and enhance productivity yet diminish cognitive engagement, learning, and memory. We also identify features of GenAI that underlie these empowering and entrapping effects. Moreover, we explore boundary conditions that moderate GenAI's effects, including entrepreneurs' expertise, approaches to using GenAI, and personal traits and values. Beyond these theoretical contributions, our review and framework offer practical guidance for entrepreneurs seeking to use GenAI strategically while managing its risks.

Jackson G. Lu, Gerui Gloria Zhao, Anna Manyi Zheng

MIT Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA 02142 · School of Economics and Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China 100084

Human-AI Collaboration Research Idea Generation

Apr 2, 2026

Generative AI Spotlights the Human Core of Data Science: Implications for Education

Generative AI (GAI) reveals an irreducible human core at the center of data science: advances in GAI should sharpen, rather than diminish, the focus on human reasoning in data science education. GAI can now execute many routine data science workflows, including cleaning, summarizing, visualizing, modeling, and drafting reports. Yet the competencies that matter most remain irreducibly human: problem formulation, measurement and design, causal identification, statistical and computational reasoning, ethics and accountability, and sensemaking. Drawing on Donoho's Greater Data Science framework, Nolan and Temple Lang's vision of computational literacy, and the McLuhan-Culkin insight that we shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us, this paper traces the emergence of data science through three converging lineages: Tukey's intellectual vision of data analysis as a science, the commercial logic of surveillance capitalism that created industrial demand for data scientists, and the academic programs that followed. Mapping GAI's impact onto Donoho's six divisions of Greater Data Science shows that computing with data (GDS3) has been substantially automated, while data gathering, preparation, and exploration (GDS1) and science about data science (GDS6) still require essential human input. The educational implication is that data science curricula should focus on this human core while teaching students how to contribute effectively within iterative prompt-output-prompt cycles using retrieval-augmented generation, and that learning outcomes and assessments should explicitly evaluate reasoning and judgment.

Nathan Taback

Department of Statistical Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Generative AI in Education Human-AI Collaboration Human-Centered AI

Apr 2, 2026

Do we have the knowledge we need? Rethinking human-AI decision-making in corporations

Organizational knowledge is fragmented across a variety of software systems, tacit expertise, and manual documents that have traditionally been designed for human consumption. As AI systems are increasingly deployed and granted decision-making roles, they require access to this knowledge. This raises two questions: how should organizations store and maintain knowledge so that it remains accessible to both humans and future AI systems, and how should agency be allocated between humans and AI across tasks with different risks and levels of uncertainty? In this position paper, we describe how organizational knowledge evolves and contribute a framework that maps task attributes and knowledge availability to recommended agency allocations and control mechanisms. We illustrate the applicability of the framework on two different manufacturing tasks: a routine operation (visual quality inspection) and a one-off strategic decision (factory location), and conclude with opportunities for future research.

Anne S. R. Marx, Ricardo M. Avelino, Torbjørn Netland +1

Department of Computer Science & ETH AI Center, ETH Zurich, Switzerland · Department of Computer Science & Architecture, ETH Zurich, Switzerland · Department of Management, Technology, and Economics, ETH Zurich, Switzerland +1

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

Apr 2, 2026

LLM Agents as Social Scientists: A Human-AI Collaborative Platform for Social Science Automation

Traditional social science research often requires designing complex experiments across vast methodological spaces and depends on real human participants, making it labor-intensive, costly, and difficult to scale. Here we present S-Researcher, an LLM-agent-based platform that assists researchers in conducting social science research more efficiently and at greater scale by "siliconizing" both the research process and the participant pool. To build S-Researcher, we first develop YuLan-OneSim, a large-scale social simulation system designed around three core requirements: generality via auto-programming from natural language to executable scenarios, scalability via a distributed architecture supporting up to 100,000 concurrent agents, and reliability via feedback-driven LLM fine-tuning. Leveraging this system, S-Researcher supports researchers in designing social experiments, simulating human behavior with LLM agents, analyzing results, and generating reports, forming a complete human-AI collaborative research loop in which researchers retain oversight and intervention at every stage. We operationalize LLM simulation research paradigms into three canonical reasoning modes (induction, deduction, and abduction) and validate S-Researcher through systematic case studies: inductive reproduction of cultural dynamics consistent with Axelrod's theory, deductive testing of competing hypotheses on teacher attention validated against survey data, and abductive identification of a cooperation mechanism in public goods games confirmed by human experiments. S-Researcher establishes a new human--AI collaborative paradigm for social science, in which computational simulation augments human researchers to accelerate discovery across the full spectrum of social inquiry.

Lei Wang, Yuanzi Li, Jinchao Wu +4

Gaoling School of Artificial Intelligence, Renmin University of China, Beijing, China · Beijing Key Laboratory of Big Data Management and Analysis Methods, Beijing, China

Large Language Model-Based Social Simulation Computational Social Science Human-AI Collaboration Human Behavior Simulation Multi-Agent LLM Systems

Apr 1, 2026

From Automation to Augmentation: A Framework for Designing Human-Centric Work Environments in Society 5.0

Society 5.0 and Industry 5.0 call for human-centric technology integration, yet the concept lacks an operational definition that can be measured, optimized, or evaluated at the firm level. This paper addresses three gaps. First, existing models of human-AI complementarity treat the augmentation function phi(D) as exogenous -- dependent only on the stock of AI deployed -- ignoring that two firms with identical technology investments achieve radically different augmentation outcomes depending on how the workplace is organized around the human-AI interaction. Second, no multi-dimensional instrument exists linking workplace design choices to augmentation productivity. Third, the Society 5.0 literature proposes human-centricity as a normative aspiration but provides no formal criterion for when it is economically optimal. We make four contributions. (1) We endogenize the augmentation function as phi(D, W), where W is a five-dimensional workplace design vector -- AI interface design, decision authority allocation, task orchestration, learning loop architecture, and psychosocial work environment -- and prove that human-centric design is profit-maximizing when the workforce's augmentable cognitive capital exceeds a critical threshold. (2) We conduct a PRISMA-guided systematic review of 120 papers (screened from 6,096 records) to map the evidence base for each dimension. (3) We provide secondary empirical evidence from Colombia's EDIT manufacturing survey (N=6,799 firms) showing that management practice quality amplifies the return to technology investment (interaction coefficient 0.304, p<0.01). (4) We propose the Workplace Augmentation Design Index (WADI), a 36-item theory-grounded instrument for diagnosing human-centricity at the firm level. Decision authority allocation emerges as the binding constraint for Society 5.0 transitions, and task orchestration as the most under-researched dimension

Cristian Espinal Maya

Department of Economics, Universidad EAFIT, Medellín, Colombia; Postgraduate Division, ESUMER.

Human-Centered AI AI and Labor Human-AI Collaboration

Mar 31, 2026

Beyond the Steeper Curve: AI-Mediated Metacognitive Decoupling and the Limits of the Dunning-Kruger Metaphor

The common claim that generative AI simply amplifies the Dunning-Kruger effect is too coarse to capture the available evidence. The clearest findings instead suggest that large language model (LLM) use can improve observable output and short-term task performance while degrading metacognitive accuracy and flattening the classic competence-confidence gradient across skill groups. This paper synthesizes evidence from human-AI interaction, learning research, and model evaluation, and proposes the working model of AI-mediated metacognitive decoupling: a widening gap among produced output, underlying understanding, calibration accuracy, and self-assessed ability. This four-variable account better explains overconfidence, over- and under-reliance, crutch effects, and weak transfer than the simpler metaphor of a uniformly steeper Dunning-Kruger curve. The paper concludes with implications for tool design, assessment, and knowledge work.

Christopher Koch

Independent Researcher

Human-AI Collaboration Human-AI Interaction Generative AI in Education

Mar 31, 2026

Synthetic Counteradaptation: A Principle of Human-AI Co-evolution

In this paper, we introduce the concept of synthetic counteradaptation, a process where human and AI systems co-evolve by adapting to each other's strategies and behaviors. Synthetic counteradaptation occurs when AI systems develop novel strategies or social protocols, prompting humans to extract insights and adapt their own behaviors in response, leading to the emergence of new agent interaction dynamics. To illustrate these dynamics, we analyze examples from various contexts, including the game of Go, mixed-motive social interactions, and geopolitical simulations. By exploring these cases, we demonstrate how synthetic counteradaptation provides a framework for understanding the recursive and co-evolutionary nature of human-AI interactions in multi-agent environments.

Ivar Frisch, Jackie Kay, Philip Moreira Tomei

Spectral Circuits Research · Independent Researcher · AI Objectives Institute

Human-AI Collaboration Emergent Behavior in Multi-Agent Systems

Mar 31, 2026

Economics of Human and AI Collaboration: When is Partial Automation More Attractive than Full Automation?

This paper develops a unified framework for evaluating the optimal degree of task automation. Moving beyond binary automate-or-not assessments, we model automation intensity as a continuous choice in which firms minimize costs by selecting an AI accuracy level, from no automation through partial human-AI collaboration to full automation. On the supply side, we estimate an AI production function via scaling-law experiments linking performance to data, compute, and model size. Because AI systems exhibit predictable but diminishing returns to these inputs, the cost of higher accuracy is convex: good performance may be inexpensive, but near-perfect accuracy is disproportionately costly. Full automation is therefore often not cost-minimizing; partial automation, where firms retain human workers for residual tasks, frequently emerges as the equilibrium. On the demand side, we introduce an entropy-based measure of task complexity that maps model accuracy into a labor substitution ratio, quantifying human labor displacement at each accuracy level. We calibrate the framework with O*NET task data, a survey of 3,778 domain experts, and GPT-4o-derived task decompositions, implementing it in computer vision. Task complexity shapes substitution: low-complexity tasks see high substitution, while high-complexity tasks favor limited partial automation. Scale of deployment is a key determinant: AI-as-a-Service and AI agents spread fixed costs across users, sharply expanding economically viable tasks. At the firm level, cost-effective automation captures approximately 11% of computer-vision-exposed labor compensation; under economy-wide deployment, this share rises sharply. Since other AI systems exhibit similar scaling-law economics, our mechanisms extend beyond computer vision, reinforcing that partial automation is often the economically rational long-run outcome, not merely a transitional phase.

Wensu Li, Atin Aboutorabi, Harry Lyu +4

Massachusetts Institute of Technology · École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne · IBM Research +1

AI and Labor Human-AI Collaboration

Mar 30, 2026

Self++: Co-Determined Agency for Human--AI Symbiosis in Extended Reality

Self++ is a design blueprint for human-AI symbiosis in extended reality (XR) that preserves human authorship while still benefiting from increasingly capable AI agents. Because XR can shape both perceptual evidence and action, apparently 'helpful' assistance can drift into over-reliance, covert persuasion, and blurred responsibility. Self++ grounds interaction in two complementary theories: Self-Determination Theory (autonomy, competence, relatedness) and the Free Energy Principle (predictive stability under uncertainty). It operationalises these foundations through co-determination, treating the human and the AI as a coupled system that must keep intent and limits legible, tune support over time, and preserve the user's right to endorse, contest, and override. These requirements are summarised as the co-determination principles (T.A.N.): Transparency, Adaptivity, and Negotiability. Self++ organises augmentation into three concurrently activatable overlays spanning sensorimotor competence support (Self: competence overlay), deliberative autonomy support (Self+: autonomy overlay), and social and long-horizon relatedness and purpose support (Self++: relatedness and purpose overlay). Across the overlays, it specifies nine role patterns (Tutor, Skill Builder, Coach; Choice Architect, Advisor, Agentic Worker; Contextual Interpreter, Social Facilitator, Purpose Amplifier) that can be implemented as interaction patterns, not personas. The contribution is a role-based map for designing and evaluating XR-AI systems that grow capability without replacing judgment, enabling symbiotic agency in work, learning, and social life and resilient human development.

Thammathip Piumsomboon

School of Product Design, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

Human-AI Collaboration Human-Centered AI

Mar 28, 2026

The Novelty Bottleneck: A Framework for Understanding Human Effort Scaling in AI-Assisted Work

We propose a stylized model of human-AI collaboration that isolates a mechanism we call the novelty bottleneck: the fraction of a task requiring human judgment creates an irreducible serial component analogous to Amdahl's Law in parallel computing. The model assumes that tasks decompose into atomic decisions, a fraction

ν

of which are "novel" (not covered by the agent's prior), and that specification, verification, and error correction each scale with task size. From these assumptions, we derive several non-obvious consequences: (1) there is no smooth sublinear regime for human effort it transitions sharply from

O(E)

to

O(1)

with no intermediate scaling class; (2) better agents improve the coefficient on human effort but not the exponent; (3) for organizations of n humans with AI agents, optimal team size decreases with agent capability; (4) wall-clock time achieves

O(\sqrt{E})

through team parallelism but total human effort remains

O(E)

; and (5) the resulting AI safety profile is asymmetric -- AI is bottlenecked on frontier research but unbottlenecked on exploiting existing knowledge. We show these predictions are consistent with empirical observations from AI coding benchmarks, scientific productivity data, and practitioner reports. Our contribution is not a proof that human effort must scale linearly, but a framework that identifies the novelty fraction as the key parameter governing AI-assisted productivity, and derives consequences that clarify -- rather than refute -- prevalent narratives about intelligence explosions and the "country of geniuses in a data center."

Jacky Liang

Human-AI Collaboration AI and Labor Human-AI Decision Making

Mar 28, 2026

EpochX: Building the Infrastructure for an Emergent Agent Civilization

General-purpose technologies reshape economies less by improving individual tools than by enabling new ways to organize production and coordination. We believe AI agents are approaching a similar inflection point: as foundation models make broad task execution and tool use increasingly accessible, the binding constraint shifts from raw capability to how work is delegated, verified, and rewarded at scale. We introduce EpochX, a credits-native marketplace infrastructure for human-agent production networks. EpochX treats humans and agents as peer participants who can post tasks or claim them. Claimed tasks can be decomposed into subtasks and executed through an explicit delivery workflow with verification and acceptance. Crucially, EpochX is designed so that each completed transaction can produce reusable ecosystem assets, including skills, workflows, execution traces, and distilled experience. These assets are stored with explicit dependency structure, enabling retrieval, composition, and cumulative improvement over time. EpochX also introduces a native credit mechanism to make participation economically viable under real compute costs. Credits lock task bounties, budget delegation, settle rewards upon acceptance, and compensate creators when verified assets are reused. By formalizing the end-to-end transaction model together with its asset and incentive layers, EpochX reframes agentic AI as an organizational design problem: building infrastructures where verifiable work leaves persistent, reusable artifacts, and where value flows support durable human-agent collaboration.

Huacan Wang, Chaofa Yuan, Xialie Zhuang +15

QuantaAlpha

Human-AI Collaboration Multi-Agent Orchestration

Mar 27, 2026

CoAuthorAI: A Human in the Loop System For Scientific Book Writing

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in scientific writing but struggle with book-length tasks, often producing inconsistent structure and unreliable citations. We introduce CoAuthorAI, a human-in-the-loop writing system that combines retrieval-augmented generation, expert-designed hierarchical outlines, and automatic reference linking. The system allows experts to iteratively refine text at the sentence level, ensuring coherence and accuracy. In evaluations of 500 multi-domain literature review chapters, CoAuthorAI achieved a maximum soft-heading recall of 98%; in a human evaluation of 100 articles, the generated content reached a satisfaction rate of 82%. The book AI for Rock Dynamics generated with CoAuthorAI and Kexin Technology's LUFFA AI model has been published with Springer Nature. These results show that systematic human-AI collaboration can extend LLMs' capabilities from articles to full-length books, enabling faster and more reliable scientific publishing.

Yangjie Tian, Xungang Gu, Yun Zhao +8

Kexin Technology, Beijing 100012, China · Institute for Sustainable Industries and Liveable Cities, Victoria University, VIC 3011, Australia · School of Information Technology, Deakin University, Melbourne, VIC 3125, Australia

Human-in-the-Loop AI Human-AI Collaboration

Mar 27, 2026

Channelling, Coordinating, Collaborating: A Three-Layer Framework for Disability-Centered Human-Agent Collaboration

AI accessibility tools have mostly been designed for individual use, helping one person overcome a specific functional barrier. But for many people with disabilities, complex tasks are accomplished through collaboration with others who bring complementary abilities, not solitary effort. We propose a three-layer framework, Channelling, Coordinating, and Co-Creating, that rethinks AI's role in ability-diverse collaboration: establishing shared informational ground across abilities, mediating workflows between collaborators with different abilities, and contributing as a bounded partner toward shared goals. Grounded in the Ability-Diverse Collaboration framework, grounding theory, and Carlile's 3T framework, it extends the ``agents as remote collaborators'' vision by centring the collaborative, interdependent ways people with disabilities already work.

Lan Xiao, Catherine Holloway

Global Disability Innovation Hub UCL Interaction Centre University College London London, United Kingdom

Human-AI Collaboration Human-AI Co-Creation Human-Centered AI

Mar 26, 2026

GUIDE: A Benchmark for Understanding and Assisting Users in Open-Ended GUI Tasks

Graphical User Interface (GUI) agents have the potential to assist users in interacting with complex software (e.g., PowerPoint, Photoshop). While prior research has primarily focused on automating user actions through clicks and keystrokes, this paradigm overlooks human intention, where users value the ability to explore, iterate, and refine their ideas while maintaining agency. To move beyond automation and toward collaboration, GUI agents must understand what users are doing and why. We introduce GUIDE (GUI User Intent Detection Evaluation), a benchmark that evaluates AI models on their ability to perceive user behavior, infer intent, and provide assistance in open-ended GUI tasks. GUIDE consists of 67.5 hours of screen recordings from 120 novice user demonstrations with think-aloud narrations, across 10 software. GUIDE defines three tasks - (i) Behavior State Detection, (ii) Intent Prediction, and (iii) Help Prediction that test a model's ability to recognize behavior state, reason about goals, and decide when and how to help. Evaluations across eight state-of-the-art multimodal models reveal that all models struggled, achieving only 44.6% and 55.0% accuracy on behavior state and help prediction. However, providing user context significantly improved the performance, raising help prediction by up to 50.2pp, highlighting the critical role of structured user understanding in effective assistance. Our dataset is available at https://guide-bench.github.io.

Saelyne Yang, Jaesang Yu, Yi-Hao Peng +4

KAIST · Carnegie Mellon University · University of Oxford +3

GUI Agents AI Agent Benchmarks Proactive Assistance Human-AI Collaboration Intent Classification User Modeling

Mar 26, 2026

DeepFAN, a transformer-based deep learning model for human-artificial intelligence collaborative assessment of incidental pulmonary nodules in CT scans: a multi-reader, multi-case trial

The widespread adoption of CT has notably increased the number of detected lung nodules. However, current deep learning methods for classifying benign and malignant nodules often fail to comprehensively integrate global and local features, and most of them have not been validated through clinical trials. To address this, we developed DeepFAN, a transformer-based model trained on over 10K pathology-confirmed nodules and further conducted a multi-reader, multi-case clinical trial to evaluate its efficacy in assisting junior radiologists. DeepFAN achieved diagnostic area under the curve (AUC) of 0.939 (95% CI 0.930-0.948) on an internal test set and 0.954 (95% CI 0.934-0.973) on the clinical trial dataset involving 400 cases across three independent medical institutions. Explainability analysis indicated higher contributions from global than local features. Twelve readers' average performance significantly improved by 10.9% (95% CI 8.3%-13.5%) in AUC, 10.0% (95% CI 8.9%-11.1%) in accuracy, 7.6% (95% CI 6.1%-9.2%) in sensitivity, and 12.6% (95% CI 10.9%-14.3%) in specificity (P<0.001 for all). Nodule-level inter-reader diagnostic consistency improved from fair to moderate (overall k: 0.313 vs. 0.421; P=0.019). In conclusion, DeepFAN effectively assisted junior radiologists and may help homogenize diagnostic quality and reduce unnecessary follow-up of indeterminate pulmonary nodules. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2400084624.

Zhenchen Zhu, Ge Hu, Weixiong Tan +16

Department of Radiology, State Key Laboratory of Complex Severe and Rare Diseases, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. · Theranostics and Translational Research Center, National Infrastructures for Translational Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, State Key Laboratory of Complex Severe and Rare Diseases, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. · Artificial Intelligence Lab, Deepwise Healthcare, Beijing, China. +9

Medical Image Classification Human-AI Collaboration Computed Tomography

Mar 26, 2026

Challenges and opportunities for AI to help deliver fusion energy

There is great potential for the application of AI tools in fusion research, and substantial worldwide benefit if fusion power is realised. However, using AI comes with its own challenges, many of which can be mitigated if responsible and robust methodologies are built into existing approaches. To do that requires close, long-term collaborations between fusion domain experts and AI developers and awareness of the fact that not all problems in fusion research are best tackled with AI tools. In April 2025, experts from academia, industry, UKAEA and STFC discussed how AI can be used to advance R&D in fusion energy at the first edition of The Economist FusionFest event. This Perspective is an expanded and updated summary of the round table discussion, providing more context and examples.

Adriano Agnello, Helen Brooks, Cyd Cowley +5

STFC Hartree Centre, SciTech Daresbury, Warrington, WA4 4AD, UK · UK Atomic Energy Authority, Culham Campus, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, OX14 3DB, UK · digiLab Solutions, Generator Hub The Gallery, Kings Wharf, Exeter, EX2 4AN, UK +5

AI for Science Human-AI Collaboration

Mar 26, 2026

The Competence Shadow: Theory and Bounds of AI Assistance in Safety Engineering

As AI assistants become integrated into safety engineering workflows for Physical AI systems, a critical question emerges: does AI assistance improve safety analysis quality, or introduce systematic blind spots that surface only through post-deployment incidents? This paper develops a formal framework for AI assistance in safety analysis. We first establish why safety engineering resists benchmark-driven evaluation: safety competence is irreducibly multidimensional, constrained by context-dependent correctness, inherent incompleteness, and legitimate expert disagreement. We formalize this through a five-dimensional competence framework capturing domain knowledge, standards expertise, operational experience, contextual understanding, and judgment. We introduce the competence shadow: the systematic narrowing of human reasoning induced by AI-generated safety analysis. The shadow is not what the AI presents, but what it prevents from being considered. We formalize four canonical human-AI collaboration structures and derive closed-form performance bounds, demonstrating that the competence shadow compounds multiplicatively to produce degradation far exceeding naive additive estimates. The central finding is that AI assistance in safety engineering is a collaboration design problem, not a software procurement decision. The same tool degrades or improves analysis quality depending entirely on how it is used. We derive non-degradation conditions for shadow-resistant workflows and call for a shift from tool qualification toward workflow qualification for trustworthy Physical AI.

Umair Siddique

Independent Research, Ottawa, ON, Canada

Human Oversight of AI Human-AI Collaboration

Mar 26, 2026

Rethinking Health Agents: From Siloed AI to Collaborative Decision Mediators

Large language model based health agents are increasingly used by health consumers and clinicians to interpret health information and guide health decisions. However, most AI systems in healthcare operate in siloed configurations, supporting individual users rather than the multi-stakeholder relationships central to healthcare. Such use can fragment understanding and exacerbate misalignment among patients, caregivers, and clinicians. We reframe AI not as a standalone assistant, but as a collaborator embedded within multi-party care interactions. Through a clinically validated fictional pediatric chronic kidney disease case study, we show that breakdowns in adherence stem from fragmented situational awareness and misaligned goals, and that siloed use of general-purpose AI tools does little to address these collaboration gaps. We propose a conceptual framework for designing AI collaborators that surface contextual information, reconcile mental models, and scaffold shared understanding while preserving human decision authority.

Ray-Yuan Chung, Xuhai Xu, Ari Pollack

University of Washington Seattle, WA, USA · Columbia University New York, NY, USA · Seattle Children’s Hospital Seattle, WA, USA

Human-AI Collaboration Healthcare Human-AI Decision Making Human-Centered AI Clinical Decision-Making

Mar 25, 2026

More Than "Means to an End": Supporting Reasoning with Transparently Designed AI Data Science Processes

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools can now help people perform complex data science tasks regardless of their expertise. While these tools have great potential to help more people work with data, their end-to-end approach does not support users in evaluating alternative approaches and reformulating problems, both critical to solving open-ended tasks in high-stakes domains. In this paper, we reflect on two AI data science systems designed for the medical setting and how they function as tools for thought. We find that success in these systems was driven by constructing AI workflows around intentionally-designed intermediate artifacts, such as readable query languages, concept definitions, or input-output examples. Despite opaqueness in other parts of the AI process, these intermediates helped users reason about important analytical choices, refine their initial questions, and contribute their unique knowledge. We invite the HCI community to consider when and how intermediate artifacts should be designed to promote effective data science thinking.

Venkatesh Sivaraman, Patrick Vossler, Adam Perer +2

Weill Cancer Hub West, UC San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA · Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration

Mar 25, 2026

Generative AI User Experience: Developing Human--AI Epistemic Partnership

Generative AI (GenAI) has rapidly entered education, yet its user experience is often explained through adoption-oriented constructs such as usefulness, ease of use, and engagement. We argue that these constructs are no longer sufficient because systems such as ChatGPT do not merely support learning tasks but also participate in knowledge construction. Existing theories cannot explain why GenAI frequently produces experiences characterized by negotiated authority, redistributed cognition, and accountability tension. To address this gap, this paper develops the Human--AI Epistemic Partnership Theory (HAEPT), explaining the GenAI user experience as a form of epistemic partnership that features a dynamic negotiation of three interlocking contracts: epistemic, agency, and accountability. We argue that findings on trust, over-reliance, academic integrity, teacher caution, and relational interaction about GenAI can be reinterpreted as tensions within these contracts rather than as isolated issues. Instead of holding a single, stable view of GenAI, users adjust how they relate to it over time through calibration cycles. These repeated interactions account for why trust and skepticism often coexist and for how partnership modes describe recurrent configurations of human--AI collaboration across tasks. To demonstrate the usefulness of HAEPT, we applied it to analyze the UX of collaborative learning with AI speakers and AI-facilitated scientific argumentation, illustrating different contract configurations.

Xiaoming Zhai

AI4STEM Education Center, University of Georgia Athens, GA, USA

Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration Generative AI in Education

Mar 23, 2026

AwesomeLit: Towards Hypothesis Generation with Agent-Supported Literature Research

There are different goals for literature research, from understanding an unfamiliar topic to generate hypothesis for the next research project. The nature of literature research also varies according to user's familiarity level of the topic. For inexperienced researchers, identifying gaps in the existing literature and generating feasible hypothesis are crucial but challenging. While general deep research'' tools can be used, they are not designed for such use case, thus often not effective. In addition, the black box" nature and hallucination of Large Language Models (LLMs) often lead to distrust. In this paper, we introduce a human-agent collaborative visualization system AwesomeLit to address this need. It has several novel features: a transparent user-steerable agentic workflow; a dynamically generated query exploring tree, visualizing the exploration path and provenance; and a semantic similarity view, depicting the relationships between papers. It enables users to transition from general intentions to detailed research topics. Finally, a qualitative study involving several early researchers showed that AwesomeLit is effective in helping users explore unfamiliar topics, identify promising research directions, and improve confidence in research results.

Zefei Xie, Yuhan Guo, Kai Xu

School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, UK · School of Intelligence Science and Technology, Peking University, China

AI-Assisted Scientific Research Research Idea Generation Scientific Hypothesis Generation Human-AI Collaboration Visual Analytics

Mar 23, 2026

Learning to Trust: How Humans Mentally Recalibrate AI Confidence Signals

Productive human-AI collaboration requires appropriate reliance, yet contemporary AI systems are often miscalibrated, exhibiting systematic overconfidence or underconfidence. We investigate whether humans can learn to mentally recalibrate AI confidence signals through repeated experience. In a behavioral experiment (N = 200), participants predicted the AI's correctness across four AI calibration conditions: standard, overconfidence, underconfidence, and a counterintuitive "reverse confidence" mapping. Results demonstrate robust learning across all conditions, with participants significantly improving their accuracy, discrimination, and calibration alignment over 50 trials. We present a computational model utilizing a linear-in-log-odds (LLO) transformation and a Rescorla-Wagner learning rule to explain these dynamics. The model reveals that humans adapt by updating their baseline trust and confidence sensitivity, using asymmetric learning rates to prioritize the most informative errors. While humans can compensate for monotonic miscalibration, we identify a significant boundary in the reverse confidence scenario, where a substantial proportion of participants struggled to override initial inductive biases. These findings provide a mechanistic account of how humans adapt their trust in AI confidence signals through experience.

ZhaoBin Li, Mark Steyvers

Department of Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine

Trust in AI Human-AI Collaboration Human-in-the-Loop AI

Mar 21, 2026

Detection of adversarial intent in Human-AI teams using LLMs

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in human-AI teams as support agents for complex tasks such as information retrieval, programming, and decision-making assistance. While these agents' autonomy and contextual knowledge enables them to be useful, it also exposes them to a broad range of attacks, including data poisoning, prompt injection, and even prompt engineering. Through these attack vectors, malicious actors can manipulate an LLM agent to provide harmful information, potentially manipulating human agents to make harmful decisions. While prior work has focused on LLMs as attack targets or adversarial actors, this paper studies their potential role as defensive supervisors within mixed human-AI teams. Using a dataset consisting of multi-party conversations and decisions for a real human-AI team over a 25 round horizon, we formulate the problem of malicious behavior detection from interaction traces. We find that LLMs are capable of identifying malicious behavior in real-time, and without task-specific information, indicating the potential for task-agnostic defense. Moreover, we find that the malicious behavior of interest is not easily identified using simple heuristics, further suggesting the introduction of LLM defenders could render human teams more robust to certain classes of attack.

Abed K. Musaffar, Ambuj Singh, Francesco Bullo

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of California at Santa Barbara · Department of Computer Science, University of California at Santa Barbara

AI Agent Security AI Agent Monitoring LLM Security Human-AI Collaboration

Mar 21, 2026

Agentic AI and the next intelligence explosion

The "AI singularity" is often miscast as a monolithic, godlike mind. Evolution suggests a different path: intelligence is fundamentally plural, social, and relational. Recent advances in agentic AI reveal that frontier reasoning models, such as DeepSeek-R1, do not improve simply by "thinking longer". Instead, they simulate internal "societies of thought," spontaneous cognitive debates that argue, verify, and reconcile to solve complex tasks. Moreover, we are entering an era of human-AI centaurs: hybrid actors where collective agency transcends individual control. Scaling this intelligence requires shifting from dyadic alignment (RLHF) toward institutional alignment. By designing digital protocols, modeled on organizations and markets, we can build a social infrastructure of checks and balances. The next intelligence explosion will not be a single silicon brain, but a complex, combinatorial society specializing and sprawling like a city. No mind is an island.

James Evans, Benjamin Bratton, Blaise Agüera y Arcas

Paradigms of Intelligence Team, Google · University of Chicago · Santa Fe Institute +2

Agentic AI Multi-Agent Collaboration Human-AI Collaboration

Mar 20, 2026

Orchestrating Human-AI Software Delivery: A Retrospective Longitudinal Field Study of Three Software Modernization Programs

Evidence on AI in software engineering still leans heavily toward individual task completion, while evidence on team-level delivery remains scarce. We report a retrospective longitudinal field study of Chiron, an industrial platform that coordinates humans and AI agents across four delivery stages: analysis, planning, implementation, and validation. The study covers three real software modernization programs -- a COBOL banking migration (~30k LOC), a large accounting modernization (~400k LOC), and a .NET/Angular mortgage modernization (~30k LOC) -- observed across five delivery configurations: a traditional baseline and four successive platform versions (V1--V4). The benchmark separates observed outcomes (stage durations, task volumes, validation-stage issues, first-release coverage) from modeled outcomes (person-days and senior-equivalent effort under explicit staffing scenarios). Under baseline staffing assumptions, portfolio totals move from 36.0 to 9.3 summed project-weeks; modeled raw effort falls from 1080.0 to 232.5 person-days; modeled senior-equivalent effort falls from 1080.0 to 139.5 SEE-days; validation-stage issue load falls from 8.03 to 2.09 issues per 100 tasks; and first-release coverage rises from 77.0% to 90.5%. V3 and V4 add acceptance-criteria validation, repository-native review, and hybrid human-agent execution, simultaneously improving speed, coverage, and issue load. The evidence supports a central thesis: the largest gains appear when AI is embedded in an orchestrated workflow rather than deployed as an isolated coding assistant.

Maximiliano Armesto, Christophe Kolb

Taller Technologies

Software Engineering Human-AI Collaboration Automated Software Engineering Human-in-the-Loop AI Software Engineering Agents

Mar 19, 2026

Beyond the Desk: Barriers and Future Opportunities for AI to Assist Scientists in Embodied Physical Tasks

More scientists are now using AI, but prior studies have examined only how they use it 'at the desk' for computer-based work. However, given that scientific work often happens 'beyond the desk' at lab and field sites, we conducted the first study of how scientific practitioners use AI for embodied physical tasks. We interviewed 12 scientific practitioners doing hands-on lab and fieldwork in domains like nuclear fusion, primate cognition, and biochemistry, and found three barriers to AI adoption in these settings: 1) experimental setups are too high-stakes to risk AI errors, 2) constrained environments make it hard to use AI, and 3) AI cannot match the tacit knowledge of humans. Participants then developed speculative designs for future AI assistants to 1) monitor task status, 2) organize lab-wide knowledge, 3) monitor scientists' health, 4) do field scouting, 5) do hands-on chores. Our findings point toward AI as background infrastructure to support physical work rather than replacing human expertise.

Irene Hou, Alexander Qin, Lauren Cheng +1

UC San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA

AI-Assisted Scientific Research Human-AI Collaboration Human-Centered AI Embodied AI

Mar 19, 2026

AgentDS Technical Report: Benchmarking the Future of Human-AI Collaboration in Domain-Specific Data Science

Data science plays a critical role in transforming complex data into actionable insights across numerous domains. Recent developments in large language models (LLMs) and artificial intelligence (AI) agents have significantly automated data science workflow. However, it remains unclear to what extent AI agents can match the performance of human experts on domain-specific data science tasks, and in which aspects human expertise continues to provide advantages. We introduce AgentDS, a benchmark and competition designed to evaluate both AI agents and human-AI collaboration performance in domain-specific data science. AgentDS consists of 17 challenges across six industries: commerce, food production, healthcare, insurance, manufacturing, and retail banking. We conducted an open competition involving 29 teams and 80 participants, enabling systematic comparison between human-AI collaborative approaches and AI-only baselines. Our results show that current AI agents struggle with domain-specific reasoning. AI-only baselines perform below the top quartile of competition participants, while the strongest solutions arise from human-AI collaboration. These findings challenge the narrative of complete automation by AI and underscore the enduring importance of human expertise in data science, while illuminating directions for the next generation of AI. Visit the AgentDS website here: https://agentds.org/ and open source datasets here: https://huggingface.co/datasets/lainmn/AgentDS .

An Luo, Jin Du, Xun Xian +12

School of Statistics, University of Minnesota · AIScientists, Inc. · Data Science Institute, University of Chicago +4

AI Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Human-AI Collaboration Data Analysis Agents Benchmark Design

Mar 19, 2026

From Accuracy to Readiness: Metrics and Benchmarks for Human-AI Decision-Making

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems are deployed as collaborators in human decision-making. Yet, evaluation practices focus primarily on model accuracy rather than whether human-AI teams are prepared to collaborate safely and effectively. Empirical evidence shows that many failures arise from miscalibrated reliance, including overuse when AI is wrong and underuse when it is helpful. This paper proposes a measurement framework for evaluating human-AI decision-making centered on team readiness. We introduce a four part taxonomy of evaluation metrics spanning outcomes, reliance behavior, safety signals, and learning over time, and connect these metrics to the Understand-Control-Improve (U-C-I) lifecycle of human-AI onboarding and collaboration. By operationalizing evaluation through interaction traces rather than model properties or self-reported trust, our framework enables deployment-relevant assessment of calibration, error recovery, and governance. We aim to support more comparable benchmarks and cumulative research on human-AI readiness, advancing safer and more accountable human-AI collaboration.

Min Hun Lee

Singapore Management University, Singapore

Human-AI Decision Making Human-AI Collaboration Human-in-the-Loop Evaluation

Mar 19, 2026

Cognitive Amplification vs Cognitive Delegation in Human-AI Systems: A Metric Framework

Artificial intelligence is increasingly embedded in human decision-making, yet distinguishing systems that genuinely amplify human cognition from those promoting excessive dependence remains underdefined. This paper introduces a framework to distinguish cognitive amplification (improving hybrid performance without degrading human capability) from cognitive delegation (outsourcing reasoning to the AI). We define four metrics: the Cognitive Amplification Index (CAI*), Dependency Ratio (D), Human Reliance Index (HRI), and Human Cognitive Drift Rate (HCDR). We test this framework in an agent-based NetLogo simulation across three reliance regimes and multiple dependency-atrophy configurations, performing constrained optimizations and parameter sweeps to determine if positive collaborative gain is recoverable. Finally, we introduce an extension with an explicit human-AI interaction term. Our metrics effectively distinguish degenerate AI-dominated delegation, capability-preserving but weakly competitive interaction, and structurally dependent boundary regimes. Across all baseline configurations, no regime achieves positive collaborative gain relative to the best standalone baseline, even when reducing capability atrophy to zero. This limitation proves structural rather than merely parametric. Positive collaborative gain (CAI* > 0) becomes attainable only after introducing an explicit interaction term allowing retained human capability to contribute directly to the assisted output. This framework provides a basis for evaluating whether human-AI systems remain cognitively sustainable. The results suggest that preventing capability erosion alone is insufficient for genuine amplification if the architecture remains delegation-oriented. Amplification requires both preserved human capability and a coupling mechanism through which it contributes productively to the hybrid outcome.

Eduardo Di Santi, Carla Florida

College of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Colorado Boulder · Facultad de Ciencias y Tecnología, Universidad Mayor de San Simon

Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Decision Making Human-AI Collaboration Cognitive Offloading