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.

Jul 1, 2026

AI, Trust, and Teaming: The Humans-as-Handlers Approach for Autonomous and Opaque AI Systems

Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming ubiquitous, and across domains, increasingly autonomous systems are carrying out tasks which raise significant ethical and legal challenges which demonstrate a need for strong human-machine teams rooted in trust. In this article, I argue that within highly impactful areas (such as medicine or warfighting) there are grounds for us initially treating autonomous and opaque systems as relevantly analogous to dogs (or other animals with which we have close relationships). Under this analogy, humans making use of these systems are not to be viewed as "users" or "deployers" of these systems, but instead take the role of "handlers". This recasting of roles shifts the way we view humans, AI-enabled and autonomous systems, and the relations between them, and moreover clarifies the clear and traceable lines of responsibility humans have for the outcomes brought about when using these systems. In developing this point, I clarify that the machine-animal analogy does admit disanalogous elements, but that its touch-points ground it as a starting point. I then explore how we can divest the humans-as-handlers approach of those aspects of our relationships with animals which are unfitting for how we engage with and make use of autonomous and AI-enabled systems. I conclude by arguing that the trajectory of human-machine teamings for autonomous and AI-enabled systems should be a state where we authentically view these not as artifacts which we simply make use of, but as collaborators with which we pursue complex goals and carry out complex tasks.

Nathan G. Wood

AI Accountability Trust in AI Human Oversight of AI Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 30, 2026

Constructing Epistemic AI Literacy: Detecting Epistemic Aims and Processes in Student-AI Co-Programming

Epistemic thinking plays a central role in students' learning processes when applying generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), particularly in programming contexts where learners must construct queries, evaluate and validate AI-generated outputs, and regulate problem-solving strategies. This study introduces the conceptual framework of Epistemic AI Literacy (EAIL), reframing AI literacy as a process-oriented epistemic phenomenon that emerges through dynamic human-AI interactions across different domains. Drawing on the AIR (epistemic aims, ideals and reliable epistemic processes) framework, this study examines how epistemic aims and epistemic processes are enacted in GenAI-supported co-programming activities and explores scalable approaches for operationalizing these constructs in interaction data. Using a large dialogue dataset of human-AI co-programming, this study identifies observable dimensions of epistemic aims (i.e., mastery-oriented aims) and epistemic processes (i.e., outsourcing, explanation seeking, verification seeking, prompt monitoring, and epistemic justification). The results reveal a prevalent lack of EAIL, with 78.8% of student-GenAI interactions relying on non-mastery-oriented aims and less reliable epistemic strategies like outsourcing and verification-seeking. Conversely, only 11.1% of interactions showed high epistemic engagement, where mastery-oriented aims were coupled with advanced epistemic strategies like epistemic justification in a more reliable epistemic process.

Mengqian Wu

™McGill University, Quebec, Canada

AI Literacy Generative AI in Education Human-AI Collaboration AI-Assisted Software Development

Jun 30, 2026

An Agentic AI Framework to Accelerate Scientific Discovery in Plant Phenotyping

High-throughput plant phenotyping now generates image derived datasets far faster than scientists can analyze them. At Oak Ridge National Laboratory's Advanced Plant Phenotyping Laboratory (APPL), automated stations image hundreds of plants daily across multiple remote sensing modalities; yet, trait extraction and interpretation remain manual, expert-bound, and strictly post-hoc, making analysis, not acquisition, the binding constraint on discovery. We present an end-to-end agentic AI framework that turns the facility from a data factory into an interactive autonomous, discovery platform, where scientists partner with AI agents to accelerate time to insight. A conversational Co-Scientist Agent translates a scientist's natural-language question into a structured analysis plan, and a headless Compute Agent dispatches Vision Transformer segmentation and trait extraction on the Frontier exascale supercomputer. The two agents run in separate security and resource domains and communicate over a secure, token-authenticated streaming channel, a design that accounts for the federation, data-movement, and provenance realities cloud-native agentic frameworks ignore, ensuring end-to-end provenance is captured for every interaction. The framework turns a days- to weeks-long analysis process into an interactive loop where agents reason over results, recommend next analyses, and respond to follow-up questions in seconds.

Renan Souza, Daniel Rosendo, Kelsey Carter +6

Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, USA

Plant Phenotyping LLM Agent Orchestration Scientific Workflow Automation Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 29, 2026

The Organizational Behavior of Agentic AI: Collective Intelligence in Human-Agent Workflows

Agentic artificial intelligence is increasingly deployed not as a single assistant but as a collective of planners, solvers, reviewers, memory managers, tool users, and orchestrators. These systems are entering organisational workflows under familiar labels such as teams, managers, committees, markets, and workflows. This article asks whether such agent collectives exhibit organisational behaviour in a sense that is analytically comparable to, yet distinct from, human organisational behaviour. I argue that agentic AI is a partial organisational analogue. It resembles a human organisation because it differentiates work, coordinates interdependence, performs recurrent routines, crosses boundaries, and produces collective outcomes. It differs because these patterns are not sustained by motivation, identity, trust, employment, socialisation, or moral accountability. They are sustained by context architecture: prompts, memory, traces, schemas, tools, validators, and permissions. The article develops contextual transaction cost as the central mechanism linking these similarities and differences. Computational theorising, synthetic task simulations, real LLM agent traces, and robustness analyses show that human-imitation forms often underperform when they add lossy handoffs, correlated deliberation, and verification burdens, whereas shared-state and adaptive forms perform better when they make context durable, inspectable, and task-contingent. The article contributes to organisation studies by theorising agentic AI as an emerging object of organising and by specifying the interface conditions under which human and agentic organisational behaviour can jointly support collective intelligence.

Canhui Liu

Department of Computer Science, University College London · The AI Hub in Generative Models

Multi-Agent Coordination Agentic Workflows Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 29, 2026

How Human Feedback Shapes AI-generated Community Notes

Community Notes, a bridging-based crowd-sourced fact-checking system, has emerged as a new mechanism for moderating misleading information on social media and has been adopted by major platforms including X, Facebook, Instagram, Threads, and TikTok. Since its introduction, there has been an open question about what role AI could play in scaling and optimizing the system. Recently, X extended its Community Notes system by introducing Collaborative Notes: notes initially drafted by an LLM and iteratively refined based on feedback from human contributors. In this work, we systematically analyze the complete corpus of 19,146 collaborative notes and 211,850 instances of human feedback. First, we develop a taxonomy of human suggestions for improving AI-generated note drafts and find that suggestions involving factual corrections and additional context are most likely to be incorporated, while subjective policy judgments rarely are. Second, we examine changes in helpfulness across versions of collaborative notes and find that human feedback leads to more helpful notes, with the greatest impact coming from suggestions that challenge the main claim in the previous draft, particularly when submitted by more active contributors. Finally, we find that although collaborative notes improve through human feedback, they reach helpful status and are shown on the platform at lower rates than human-only or AI-only notes, with limited human participation emerging as a key bottleneck. Nevertheless, rather than serving as a weaker substitute, collaborative notes tend to play a complementary role, predominantly targeting posts that do not attract human-only or AI-only notes. Our analysis provides an initial description of efforts to use AI to improve crowdsourced content moderation in a real-world moderation system and outlines pathways for future improvements to such features.

Soham De, Isaac Slaughter, Jiawei Guo +4

University of Washington

Claim Verification Automated Fact-Checking Human-AI Collaboration Human-AI Co-Creation

Jun 29, 2026

To Tab or Not to Tab: Measuring Critical Engagement in AI Code Completion Tools Using Behavioral Signals and Attention Checks

AI code completion tools, such as Github Copilot, provide students with code suggestions to help them write programs. However, recent qualitative studies suggest that students fail to critically evaluate these suggestions. We present Clover, a code completion tool that logs students' interactions with code suggestions and additionally offers attention checks to probe reflective engagement during programming tasks. We also develop a taxonomy of behavioral interaction metrics for AI-assisted programming, informed by literature. We analyzed relationships between interaction patterns, engagement with attention checks, and task performance. We observed that higher rates of tab accept were associated with lower attention check performance, while increased dwell time was associated with higher attention check performance. We conclude by discussing how programming process data and attention checks might support reflective engagement in AI-assisted programming.

Jessica Hutchison, Ian Tyler Applebaum, Kenneth Angelikas +6

Temple University Philadelphia, USA

Computer Science Education AI in Education Code Generation Human-AI Collaboration AI-Assisted Software Development

Jun 29, 2026

Clarus: Coordinating Autonomous Research Agents toward Web-Scale Scientific Collaboration

Existing autonomous research agents can support parts of the research process, but most systems still treat research as either an isolated assistant task or a closed workflow. Therefore, autonomous science needs a collaboration infrastructure that coordinates projects, agents, and digital and physical resources. We identify this as a shift from code-centered execution loops to research-oriented collaboration processes, where questions, evidence, participants, and resources must be coordinated under uncertainty. In this framing, an agent may be an AI system, a human researcher, a team, a laboratory, or an organization-backed participant. To this end, we present Clarus, a collaboration infrastructure for coordinating autonomous research agents toward web-scale scientific collaboration. Clarus reformulates research as an open, auditable, attributable, and resource-aware multi-phase collaboration process. It defines a minimal project-agent-resource object model and organizes scientific collaboration through four layers including Research Application, Digital Collaboration, Physical Substrate, and Physical World. Core modules are implemented as pluggable mechanisms, allowing Clarus to adapt to task risk, collaboration structure, and resource constraints. Through a controlled paper-generation case study, we show that Clarus can organize a research goal into a traceable, reviewable, attributable, and accumulative collaboration network across phases, tasks, and participants. Together, the object model, collaboration protocol, trust mechanisms, and prototype validation provide an initial foundation for open research networks. Clarus is now available at clarus.holosai.io.

Zihan Guo, Zeyi Chen, Zhiyu Chen +15

Sun Yat-sen University · Shanghai Innovation Institute · Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory +4

Multi-Agent Orchestration Multi-Agent Collaboration Human-AI Collaboration Autonomous Research Agents

Jun 29, 2026

SWE-Together: Evaluating Coding Agents in Interactive User Sessions

Most coding-agent benchmarks are static: an agent receives a complete task description up front and is judged only by its final code. Real coding assistance is interactive, with users clarifying goals, adding constraints, and correcting mistakes over multiple turns. We introduce SWE-Together, a multi-turn benchmark reconstructed from real user-agent coding sessions. To make real interactions verifiable, we curate 109 repository-level tasks from 11,260 recorded sessions, selecting sessions with recoverable repository states, clear user goals, and observable outcomes. To replay these interactions across agents, we build a reactive LLM-based user simulator that preserves the original users' intents and provides feedback when the coding agent's progress requires it. To evaluate agents as collaborators, we measure both final repository correctness and the number of corrective feedback turns required during the interaction. Experiments with frontier coding agents show that stronger agents generally achieve higher final success rates while requiring fewer interventions, suggesting an improved user experience.

Yifan Wu, Zhuokai Zhao, Songlin Li +8

Coding Agents AI Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 29, 2026

DeepTrans Studio: Turning Expert Interventions into Shared Team Knowledge in Agentic Translation Workflows

Professional translation is often a team-based process: translators, reviewers, and project managers must coordinate terminology, legal force, and accountability across documents. Yet many LLM-based translation tools treat human corrections as isolated edits. Expert decisions made in one segment or by one member are rarely captured as reusable knowledge for the rest of the team. We present DeepTrans Studio, a collaborative translation workspace that lets professionals intercept selected nodes in an agentic translation workflow, review evidence, revise AI outputs, and save approved decisions to a shared team memory. During the demo, attendees will role-play translators and reviewers, resolve preset terminology and legal-modal risks, and see how their decisions are propagated to downstream segments and surfaced in a teammate's workspace as reusable precedents. The demo illustrates how human interventions in AI-mediated work can become shared, traceable knowledge rather than one-off corrections.

Ziyang Lian, Qingya Zhang, Hao Wang +5

School of Computer Engineering and Science, Shanghai University, China · School of Foreign Languages, East China Normal University, China · School of Foreign Studies, Shanghai University, China +1

Agentic Workflows Human-AI Collaboration Machine Translation Memory-Augmented Language Model Agents

Jun 28, 2026

LLMography: Transforming Human-AI Conversations into Traceability, Oversight, and Auditability Indicators

The growing use of Large Language Models (LLMs) in education, software engineering, academic writing, and technical documentation raises a key question: how can we evaluate not only AI-assisted outputs, but also the interaction process that produced them? Current debates often focus on detecting whether a final artifact was generated by AI, while overlooking the conversation history that reveals human direction, AI contribution, corrections, validation, and traceability. This paper introduces LLMography, a framework for transforming Human-AI conversations into measurable indicators of provenance, human contribution, AI dependency, reproducibility, and auditability. By analogy with bibliography and webography, LLMography documents the dynamic trajectory of interaction between a human and a Large Language Model as a structured trace of Human-AI co-production. We present a prototype that analyzes Human-AI conversation traces and generates KPI reports including Prompt Quality Score, Human Direction Score, AI Dependency Level, Auditability Score, Final Output Traceability, Privacy Risk Level, and a recommended LLMography label. A preliminary exploratory evaluation was conducted on 19 anonymized audit reports from engineering students. Most interactions were classified as Human-AI co-produced, with average scores of 86.8/100 for Human Direction, 81.9/100 for Prompt Quality, 72.8/100 for Auditability, and 77.1/100 for Final Output Traceability. The paper also applies LLMography to its own writing process, classified as human-originated, human-directed, AI-assisted co-production. The findings suggest that AI transparency should move beyond output detection toward documenting the history of interaction.

Mohammed Bousmah

LTI Laboratory, National School of Applied Sciences, Chouaib Doukkali University, El Jadida, Morocco

LLM Auditing Human Oversight of AI Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 27, 2026

Managing the Human Fallback: Skill Investment Under Improving AI and Worker Mobility

When firms deploy autonomous AI, they must decide how much work to leave to the system and how much to keep workers engaged. This decision affects current output and future human capital. We develop a parsimonious two-period model in which AI may outperform the worker when it functions, but may fail with positive probability. A firm chooses worker engagement; engagement lowers current output for below-benchmark workers, but changes future skill through learning and erosion. We distinguish two dimensions of AI progress: capability, the system's output when it works, and reliability, the probability that it works. In a single-firm benchmark, engagement is valuable only as fallback investment. The firm engages the least-skilled workers most, because they have the largest skill gaps and are least costly to bring toward a useful fallback level. With worker mobility, engagement also affects labor-market sorting: workers prefer jobs that build more valuable skill trajectories. This sorting motive targets higher-skill workers near the AI frontier, where skill gains are more valuable and engagement is less costly. Mobility can therefore reverse the engagement pattern, shifting investment from the least-skilled toward the most-skilled workers below the AI benchmark. Mobility also reshapes how AI progress affects engagement: greater capability raises engagement by increasing the value of the skill trajectory a firm offers, whereas greater reliability can raise or lower it because it reduces fallback need while also changing learning opportunities. Under worker mobility, human-AI work design becomes a problem of human-capital investment, in which allocating work today shapes future skill.

Simrita Singh, Naireet Ghosh, Tinglong Dai

Leavey School of Business, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, California, 95053 · Naveen Jindal School of Management, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas, 75080 · Carey Business School, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21202

Human-AI Collaboration AI and Labor

Jun 26, 2026

Towards Automating Scientific Review with Google's Paper Assistant Tool

Artificial intelligence is driving a revolution in scientific discovery, accelerating everything from hypothesis generation to mathematical theorem proving. However, this rapid acceleration is creating a systemic challenge: traditional human peer review cannot scale to match the influx of AI-assisted science. Ultimately, to resolve this tension, we must also deploy AI to accelerate the verification and review process itself. To frame the discussion around this transition, we propose a taxonomy consisting of four progressive levels of AI-human collaboration in scientific evaluation, and discuss various trade-offs involved with each. As a step toward this future, we introduce the Paper Assistant Tool (PAT), an agentic AI framework built for deep scientific review and verification. PAT ingests full scientific manuscripts and produces a comprehensive evaluation, checking theoretical results, validating experiments, suggesting improvements, and identifying potential flaws. By utilizing inference scaling techniques, PAT is able to identify deeper issues than a single model call alone, achieving a 34% improvement over zero-shot recall on mathematical errors in the SPOT benchmark. Pilot deployments of PAT as a pre-submission tool for authors at two major Computer Science conferences -- STOC and ICML -- demonstrate its ability to identify critical errors and suggest substantive improvements to research papers. By catching errors early, PAT eases the cognitive burden placed on referees, while preserving their control over the outcomes of the review process.

Rajesh Jayaram, Drew Tyler, David Woodruff +4

Google Research, USA · Google Research & Carnegie Mellon University, USA · Carnegie Mellon University, USA

Automated Peer Review Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 26, 2026

Reasoning Beyond Prediction: From Data-Driven to Causal Software Engineering

Software engineering is an intellectually demanding, creative discipline that juggles a web of interdependent tasks to design, build, and assure the quality of increasingly complex systems. As our expectations from software soar - with demands spanning AI-driven products, pervasively distributed and cloud-native architectures, and deeply embedded cyber-physical environments - its complexity steadily increases. In response, a new wave of co-engineering methods and tools, fueled by deep learning, has emerged to augment the process, enhancing automation and decision support. Yet, these advances remain far from delivering the kind of intelligent support that modern software development demands. We call for a new paradigm of human-machine cooperation: one where machines don't just automate routine tasks or predict from learned patterns, but actively amplify engineers' reasoning through the lens of causation. As software becomes smarter, a smarter support is needed.

Roberto Pietrantuono, Luca Giamattei, Stefano Russo

University of Naples Federico II, Italy

Software Engineering Causal Reasoning Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 25, 2026

Bridging Talk and Thought: Understanding Dialogue Dynamics Across Collaborative Problem-Solving Contexts

We present a conceptual framework for analyzing dialogue in collaborative problem-solving contexts, with an emphasis on the emerging dynamics of human-AI and multi-agent collaboration. As intelligent systems become active agents capable of autonomous reasoning and strategic cooperation, understanding the dialogic interaction during collaborative problem solving is increasingly important for optimizing and evaluating such partnerships. Our framework addresses key limitations in current analytical approaches through a hierarchical two-layer coding scheme that integrates cognitive and non-cognitive problem solving with metacognitive regulatory mechanisms. We demonstrate its effectiveness and generalizability across nine datasets spanning multiple domains, and provide insights into how humans and agents coordinate their knowledge, skills, and efforts to solve complex problems, showing in particular that metacognitive regulation can be an essential discriminator of deeper collaboration.

Zhengyuan Liu, Stella Xin Yin, Min-Yen Kan +1

Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore · Nanyang Technological University, Singapore · National University of Singapore

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

Jun 25, 2026

HiLSVA: Design and Evaluation of a Human-in-the-Loop Agentic System for Scientific Visualization

Large language model (LLM) agents enable natural language interaction for scientific visualization (SciVis). Still, prior systems have essentially prioritized autonomy over human analytical control, thereby limiting transparency and human oversight. We present HiLSVA, a human-in-the-loop agentic system that supports mixed-initiative SciVis workflows. HiLSVA integrates a plan-first multi-agent architecture with explicit human oversight, stepwise provenance tracking, and learn-at-test-time adaptation from user feedback. The system supports fluid handoff between humans and agents through both natural language and direct manipulation of visualizations, while sandboxed execution ensures safe, reproducible workflows. In doing so, HiLSVA reframes agentic SciVis as a collaborative process that augments, rather than replaces, human analytical reasoning. We evaluate HiLSVA through representative case studies and a controlled user study with twelve participants of varying expertise across multiple autonomy settings. Results show that mixed-initiative interaction improves task completion, user control, and workflow transparency across different levels of user expertise, while revealing a tradeoff between execution efficiency and human oversight. These findings highlight the importance of human-centered design in agentic SciVis and guide the development of future collaborative visualization systems. We encourage readers to explore our demo video, case studies, and source code at https://hilsva.github.io/.

Kuangshi Ai, Patrick Phuoc Do, Chaoli Wang

Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA

Scientific Visualization Data Visualization Multi-Agent LLM Systems Agentic Workflows Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 25, 2026

DanceDuo: Bridging Human Movement and AI Choreography

In recent years, advancements in deep learning and generative models have revolutionized music-driven dance generation. This paper introduces a novel platform, namely DanceDuo, leveraging diffusion models to generate AI-choreographed dance sequences synchronized with a variety of music genres, to encourage dancing practice. The system allows users to interact with AI by selecting music tracks, humanoid models, and importing personal dance videos for comparison, fostering a rich and engaging user experience. DanceDuo not only offers dance generation but also integrates human pose estimation models to provide users with insightful comparisons of their own performances with AI-generated sequences. We conducted a comprehensive user study, revealing that users found the interface intuitive, with particular praise for the dance comparison feature. Our DanceDuo contributes significantly to the integration of AI in dance choreography, offering novel avenues for both recreational and professional applications.

Gia-Cat Bui-Le, Tuong-Vy Truong-Thuy, Hai-Dang Nguyen +1

University of Science, VNU-HCM, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam · Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Human Motion Generation Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 24, 2026

The impact of artificial intelligence on enterprise software user roles

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly reshaping the nature of work in software development, transforming user roles, workflows, and collaboration patterns across enterprise platforms. This qualitative study investigates how AI alters professional responsibilities within the context of SAP's Business Technology Platform (BTP), combining expert interviews (n=20) and a participatory workshop (n=24). The results reveal substantial shifts in day-to-day tasks and roles in the development domain, characterized by increasing automation of operational tasks, expanding human-AI collaboration, and growing reliance on agentic AI systems. The study further identifies significant implications for existing user-role frameworks, such as the BTP User Type Matrix, which requires adaptation as the workforce is undergoing significant role specific changes. Collectively, these findings highlight a workforce landscape in transition and underscore the need for revised role taxonomies, new governance and oversight functions, and updated design approaches for AI-native enterprise software systems.

Isabel Unger, Elizangela Valarini, Martin Schrepp +3

SAP SE · Fresenius Hochschule Heidelberg

Human-AI Collaboration AI-Assisted Software Development

Jun 23, 2026

Measuring User's Mental Models of Speech Translation in Human-AI Collaboration

Millions of people use machine translation (MT) tools daily, yet little is known about their perception of what systems can and cannot do. This paper studies users' mental models of speech translation systems through a new framework based on cross-lingual question answering, where users either accept MT output or request professional re-translation to answer questions based on the information presented in a foreign language. By analyzing user behavior and accuracy trends across varying translation qualities, we examine to what extent they can predict where the system is likely to be wrong, and how this mental model evolves. Users develop stronger mental models with practice, especially when they have some knowledge of the source language, primarily by relying on surface-level error cues. Moreover, providing speech transcriptions can help users develop better mental models. Our results show the promise of cross-lingual question answering as a downstream task for studying MT mental models and advancing our understanding of human-AI collaboration.

HyoJung Han, Nishant Balepur, Jordan Boyd-Graber +1

University of Maryland, College Park, USA

Speech Translation Human-AI Collaboration Machine Translation

Jun 23, 2026

The impact of generative artificial intelligence on academic development of Chinese students in humanities and social sciences

Generative artificial intelligence(GenAI) is reshaping learning in higher education, with particularly pronounced implications for the humanities and social sciences(HSS), where learning outcomes are commonly expressed through written and interpretive forms that align closely with GenAI's capabilities. Yet, systematic evidence on the educational impacts of GenAI on HSS students remains limited. Addressing this gap, this study draws on a large-scale survey of HSS students in China to examine its role in academic development. Guided by relevant learning theories, this study focuses on four dimensions: patterns of use, effects on learning processes and academic performance, challenges associated with GenAI use, and preferred approaches to curricular integration. We found that more than half perceived enhanced learning motivation, independent thinking and creativity, although a substantial minority reported little change or even decline. Comparatively, a notably larger majority reported academic performance gains, although these gains may partly reflect limitations in conventional assessment practices. The study identifies variations in perceived learning and performance improvements among students with differing durations of GenAI experience, along with observable disciplinary differences and modest gender differences. While an overwhelming majority valued the importance of ethical considerations, only slightly more than half were satisfied with privacy protection. Limited accuracy and overreliance emerged as the most pressing concerns reported by students. Students favored partial or optional curricular integration supported by practice-oriented training, and widely recognized GenAI's significance for their future professional development. Grounded in student perspectives, this study offers evidence-based recommendations for the responsible and pedagogically meaningful integration of GenAI

Lei Fan, Fangxue Liu

Design School, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, Suzhou, 215123, China · School of Computer Science and Informatics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3BX, UK

AI in Education Generative AI in Education Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 22, 2026

Ten Digits on a Train: AI-Assisted Verification of Two Eigenvalue Problems

Accurate numerical eigenvalues are often difficult to certify, especially in singular or non-normal settings. This article reports a human--AI collaboration on two such computations. For a singular self-adjoint Schrödinger operator, a verified zero count and Dirichlet--Neumann bracketing certify the complete negative spectrum to ten decimal places. For a delicate non-normal atom--molecule benchmark, a previously unresolved resonance pair is separated, with each member enclosed to ten digits. The second result is achieved not by increasing the precision of one-way shooting, but by reformulating the problem as a global matching system for projective solution lines. The infinite tail is encoded as uncertainty in the terminal projective data, and a componentwise, tail-robust Krawczyk--Brouwer inclusion supplies the certificate. This gives a reusable architecture for analytic boundary-value systems with ill-conditioned propagation and uncertain asymptotic data. The collaboration also exposes the strengths and limits of AI assistance. AI rapidly produced accurate candidates and plausible proof strategies, but several failed, including one apparently complete tail argument that omitted the componentwise check required by a nonuniform polydisc. Validated computation is a stringent test of AI-assisted mathematics: the output is not merely a number, but a number with a proof. These examples show why the proof object matters, and why human mathematical judgment remained decisive. More broadly, as AI makes code, exposition, and plausible numerical claims inexpensive, standards for verification, attribution, peer review, and training must adapt. The implications are unsettling; the opportunity is extraordinary.

Matthew J. Colbrook

Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB3 0WA.

Formal Verification Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 21, 2026

Beyond Simpson's Paradox: A Cascade of Confounders in AI Agent Pull-Request Co-Authorship

Pooled across five AI coding agents, pull requests (PRs) with a human Co-Authored-By trailer merge less often than purely-autonomous ones (53.8% vs. 79.8%) -- yet this aggregate finding is a textbook Simpson's Paradox. Stratifying 33,596 PRs from the AIDev dataset by agent identity reverses the conclusion: Copilot and Devin show large positive within-agent gaps (+41.2 and +33.5 pp, both p<0.001), while Cursor, Claude Code, and Codex show small effects whose cross-sectional 95% CIs span zero. The paradox is driven entirely by agent composition: Codex, which dominates 64.9% of the dataset, achieves high merge rates while rarely using co-authorship. But Simpson's Paradox is only the first layer of a cascade of confounders: within-repo controls eliminate Devin's gap (+33.5 to +1.6 pp, p=0.73); a commit-count control further halves Copilot's within-repo gap (+36.2 to +24.4 pp); restricted to multi-commit PRs, the Copilot within-repo effect dissolves to +4.8 pp (p=0.59). No agent retains a clear co-authorship effect once both repository selection and PR structure are controlled. Our findings caution against reporting agent-pooled statistics without stratification and demonstrate that cross-sectional co-authorship associations are largely selection and PR-structure artefacts rather than evidence of a causal benefit.

Haoran Yu, Xiaochong Jiang, Lifei Liu +3

Independent Researcher Seattle, WA, USA · Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA, USA · Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA, USA

Software Engineering AI Coding Agents Causal Reasoning Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 20, 2026

AI-Mediated Negotiation: Design Reflections and Lessons

Conversational AI promises a new kind of preparation for high-stakes workplace negotiations -- personalized, interactive, and capable of simulating realistic resistance. That promise is intuitive. We built Trucey, a theory-driven coaching system, to test it. The system encoded four assumptions: that articulation supports clarification, that personalization builds strategic competence, that chunked delivery reduces cognitive load, and that structured scaffolding removes metacognitive burden. A pre-registered experiment (N=267) and interviews (N=15) complicated each of them. Notably, the static handbook we included as a passive control outperformed both AI conditions on empowerment and usability. We reflect on why: each assumption encoded a specific model of how preparation unfolds, and the findings revealed that conversational AI imposes a linear execution model on a task that is fundamentally recursive. We identify an unexamined scope condition on established HAI design guidelines and close with a sequencing principle -- map before path, path before simulation -- for future AI coaching design.

Veda Duddu, Jash Rajesh Parekh, Andy Mao +4

University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, USA · University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, USA · Johns Hopkins University, USA +1

Human-AI Interaction Human-Centered AI Conversational Agents Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 16, 2026

Searching for Synergy in Shared Workspace Human-AI Collaboration

Automated AI agents are increasingly capable, yet many scientific and professional tasks require human judgment and contextual expertise. We use simulated shared-workspace human-AI teams as a controlled testbed for studying how collaboration structure shapes team behavior. Using the Collaborative Gym environment with tasks from DiscoveryBench, we vary team compositions and collaboration structures across 1,482 sessions. We find that adding additional collaborators can lower performance when coordination structure is absent. We then evaluate collaboration scaffolding that combines shared group memory with simulated human-in-the-loop (HITL) gates, where selected actions require approval from a designated simulated participant. This scaffolding improves performance, most clearly in three-person teams, with clearer responsibility signals and stronger routing of expertise to team actions. Overall, our results suggest that coordination structure is central to whether available capability improves team outcomes.

Nachiket Kotalwar, Rohini Das, Carolyn Rose

1Carnegie Mellon University.

Multi-Agent Coordination Human-in-the-Loop AI Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 15, 2026

Stable Menus of Public Goods: AI-Enabled Progress

Using an open problem from the EC 2025 paper "Stable Menus of Public Goods" as a testbed, we conduct experiments to understand the effectiveness of different AI-for-EconCS research workflows. Specifically, we study three questions: Does providing human intuition in the prompt help? Does automated multi-turn interaction help? And, does an LLM outperform a first-year PhD student? Regarding the first two questions, we provide evidence for the following workflow suggestions: (1) prompting with human intuition can encourage the LLM to have better "taste", (2) multi-turn workflows help when the pipeline encourages "ambitious" steps. Regarding the third question, using an unpublished manuscript written by the paper's senior authors prior to collaborating with the first-year PhD student, we compare the effectiveness of the LLM with that of the first-year PhD student, and find that the LLM is slightly less effective.

Sara Fish

School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University.

AI-Assisted Scientific Research Human-AI Collaboration Generative AI Evaluation

Jun 14, 2026

SCAN: A Decision-Making Framework for Effective Task Allocation with Generative AI

We introduce SCAN -- a human-centric decision-making framework to facilitate learners for effective task allocation with Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) based on Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development and Metacognition. In SCAN, we systematize and formalize AI-human interaction by introducing a task-identification approach with four "sub-zones": Substitute, Complement, Aid, and Non-negotiable. After describing the four sub-zones, we demonstrate how SCAN framework can be applied for knowledge workers in the workplace and students in education to metacognitively "scan" their use of Generative AI. We then discuss how such framework can be related to cognitive load theory, cognitive offloading, sycophancy, three decision-making modes in human-AI interactions (automation, augmentation, and collaboration), future of work such as upskilling and deskilling, and how it accounts for both human-human and human-AI learning. We propose that SCAN offers a great starting point before discussing whether GenAI complements or replaces our abilities when completing a task, with a general objective of sustaining lifelong learning, and a specific goal of reaching hybrid intelligence.

Fendi Tsim, Alina Gutoreva

1Independent Researcher, London, United Kingdom · School of IT and Engineering, Kazakh-British Technical University, Almaty, Kazakhstan

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

Jun 11, 2026

Understanding the Rejection of Fixes Generated by Agentic Pull Requests -- Insights from the AIDev Dataset

AI coding agents are increasingly used to generate pull requests (PRs) that propose code fixes in software projects. From a first exploration of the AIDev dataset, we find that 46.41% of the fixes proposed by the agents Copilot, Devin, Cursor, and Claude are rejected. This represents a significant amount of wasted resources that require human reviews, verifications, and running tests and validations for fixes that are merely discarded. Our goal in this paper is to understand the failure modes of AI-agents, an understanding that is crucial for better integrating AI-agents as efficient teammates. In this paper, we conduct a qualitative study on a representative sample of 306 non-merged pull requests created or co-authored by the agents mentioned earlier, followed by a quantitative analysis of the reasons for rejection. Our qualitative findings identify 14 reasons divided into four high-level categories for rejecting AI-agent fixes. We observe that developers can reject fixes due to fixes whose implementation is incorrect (e.g., incomplete, wrong approach), fixes that do not pass the continuous integration (CI) pipelines and fail tests, fixes for which the agent is unable to perform the implementation (e.g., no code generated, sessions lost), and fixes whose priority is low. Our results shed light on the importance of better guiding the model at these levels: (1) proposing hints about the approach to follow for fixing an issue, (2) outlining constraints or limitations regarding the approaches that should not be taken, and (3) instructing the agent on how to validate the implementation through CI pipelines and without introducing a breaking change. Our results suggest the need for good prioritization of tasks so that generated fixes do not lead to wasted human review efforts or wasted agent resources (e.g., tokens, compute, or allowed number of requests).

Mahmoud Abujadallah, Ali Arabat, Mohammed Sayagh

École de Technologie Supérieure Montréal, Canada

Agentic Code Generation Human-AI Collaboration LLM Agent Reliability

Jun 11, 2026

TwinBI: An Agentic Digital Twin for Efficient Augmented Interactions with Business Intelligence Dashboards

Business intelligence (BI) increasingly combines dashboard interaction with LLM-based assistance, but these two modes often fall out of sync during multi-step analysis. As users switch between direct dashboard manipulation and natural-language queries, it becomes difficult to preserve a consistent analytical state across filters, hierarchies, metrics, and chart context. We present TwinBI, an agentic digital-twin framework that couples an LLM-based agent system with an executable BI dashboard state. TwinBI unifies conversational interaction, dashboard manipulation, semantic grounding, and provenance tracking through a shared analytical state reconstructed from a unified interaction log. It also exposes artifacts such as schema views, SQL, logs, and an /insights command for state-grounded analytical summaries. We evaluate TwinBI in two complementary ways. In a controlled A/B benchmark with the same backbone agent, TwinBI improves exact-match accuracy from 43.3% to 63.3%, partial-credit accuracy from 48.3% to 70.8%, and substantially reduces timeout rate from 40.0% to 10.0% relative to Dashboard alone. In a usability study, participants benefited from the integrated dashboard-and-chat workflow, with high task accuracy, moderate workload, and favorable ratings for state-aware interaction mechanisms. These results suggest that TwinBI improves both agent-level analytical reliability and user-facing analytical support by turning visible dashboard state into richer actionable context. Our dataset and source code are available at: https://github.com/simonjisu/TwinBI

Jisoo Jang Wen-Syan Li

Graduate School of Data Science, Seoul National University

AI-Assisted Decision Making LLM Agents Digital Twins Human-AI Collaboration LLM Agent Reliability

Jun 11, 2026

Exploring How Agent Voice Accents Shape Human-AI Collaboration in K-12 Group Learning

Collaboration is widely recognized as a cornerstone of 21st-century education, yet teachers still encounter persistent challenges in fostering productive peer interaction. LLM conversational peer agents introduce new possibilities for mediating in-person group work, raising questions about how persona design, particularly their voice characteristics, shapes learners' perceptions, trust, and interactional dynamics. While prior work has examined agent accent effects in one-to-one settings, little is known about how these effects manifest in groups. We conducted a between-subjects mixed-methods study with 33 teachers examining how a GenAI voice agent with different accents (British, Indian, and African American) influenced collaboration and agent perception. Across surveys, group interaction analyses, and artifacts, we find that accent shaped participants' mental models and the roles the agent assumed in group interaction. The British-accented agent was largely treated as a tool and engaged in detached, utility-based ways, whereas Indian- and African American-accented agents were more readily anthropomorphized and integrated as peers. These role expectations influenced trust, engagement, and reliance over time. This work advances understanding of how GenAI's sociolinguistic design features shape group dynamics in CSCL, with implications for designing culturally inclusive AI partners in group learning.

Prerna Ravi, Carúmey Stevens, Ben Hurt +3

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge MA 02139, USA

Educational Technology Generative AI in Education LLM Agents Human-AI Collaboration

Jun 10, 2026

Nonslop: A Gamified Experiment in Human-AI Collaborative Writing

The rapid proliferation of large language models (LLMs) raises critical questions about human creativity and individual expression in an era of AI-assisted creation. When do humans adopt AI suggestions, and what are the implications for individual voice? This study examines these questions through a gamified writing exercise where 74 participants (214 responses) replied to prompts while AI-generated word suggestions were available as they wrote. The game simulates a dystopian future in which an AI is attempting to learn from what remains of human individuality, and disincentivizes AI-like writing. In doing so, it attempts to create conditions that reveal authentic user preferences rather than default behaviors, such as accepting a readily available AI-generated suggestion. Note that this is a deliberate inversion of the "helpful assistant" design pattern; the system is explicitly forbidding you from accepting AI suggestions. We analyze user behavior patterns across different task types, user behaviors, and response characteristics to understand the factors influencing human-AI interaction in creative tasks. The study focuses on when users choose to maintain creative autonomy versus violating the rules of the game and accepting AI assistance. It also explores how these choices relate to response patterns, task characteristics, and user behavior. This gamified approach offers both a framework for studying authentic human-AI interaction and a provocative lens for understanding the tension between efficiency and authenticity in AI-augmented creativity.

Maria Edwards, Julian Togelius

New York University New York, USA

Human Preference Modeling Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration Human-AI Co-Creation

Jun 10, 2026

Designing AI-Supported Focus Groups: A Role x Modality Playbook

Collecting participants' lived experiences is central to design research. Focus groups are uniquely valuable because participants not only share individual accounts but also respond to one another, surfacing comparison, disagreement, and collective sensemaking. However, focus groups are resource-intensive and highly sensitive to facilitation: moderators must probe for specificity, balance participation, manage topic flow, and sustain psychological safety, and subtle facilitation choices can shape what becomes salient. Recent HCI work and commercial meeting tools show that generative AI can scaffold live conversation through prompting, turn regulation, thematic mapping, and real-time summarization. Yet UXR teams lack a clear map of what these capabilities mean in focus groups and what methodological risks they introduce. We synthesize AI supports for live conversation and translate them into a focus-group-specific playbook organized by AI role (tool, co-host, host) and modality (text, voice, embodied).We synthesize prior work on AI-supported live conversation and propose a focus-group-specific playbook of AI supports organized by role (tool, co-host, host) and modality (text, voice, embodied). We characterize interactional trade-offs and identify open questions for evaluating AI-supported focus groups as methodological configurations.

Zhiqing Wang, Steven Dow

University of California, San Diego, USA

Human-AI Interaction Conversational Agents Human-AI Collaboration