Human-In-The-Loop

Finite element (FE) modeling of safety-critical infrastructure such as bridge barriers requires high-fidelity nonlinear dynamic analysis, yet the current FE modeling process remains labor-intensive and lacks automation. This paper presents the Human-Enhanced Loop Modeling (HELM) framework, a collaborative human-agent protocol that decomposes long-sequence finite element modeling into discrete, visually verifiable checkpoints across geometry generation, boundary condition definition, and material assignment. The framework is demonstrated through a 20-case matrix of reinforced concrete bridge barriers under MASH TL-4 and TL-5 lateral loading conditions, interfacing specialized agents with two widely used commercial FE softwares, i.e., ANSYS and LS-PrePost. Experimental results show that HELM improves the baseline autonomous modeling success rate from 20% to 75%, with agent-level pass rates for geometry and boundary condition tasks approximately doubling. Error analysis reveals that spatial reasoning and algebraic logic limitations constitute the primary failure modes, underscoring the value of structured human-in-the-loop intervention for modeling automation. The complete agent design code and prompts are open-sourced and can be accessed at: https://github.com/SimAgentDev/Ansys-LSPP-AgentKit.

As LLM agents begin to take real, irreversible actions (shell commands, file edits, deploys), the standard safety pattern is a human-in-the-loop approval gate: risky actions pause and wait for a person. We argue the gate is the easy part; the hard part is the judgment - which actions to stop - which the field evaluates against two false assumptions: that there is a ground-truth notion of "risky," and that the human reviewer is a perfect, infinitely-available oracle. On a hand-labeled set of 125 adversarially-weighted agent actions we show that (i) reviewers only moderately agree on what is risky (Fleiss' kappa = 0.52), so there is no single correct label; (ii) framing the guard as selective classification under asymmetric cost makes its operating limits measurable, and on hard inputs the guard cannot safely auto-decide; and (iii) when the reviewer is modeled as endogenous (fatiguing as escalation load grows), realized safety becomes an inverted-U in the escalation rate: more human oversight can make a system less safe, and the safety-optimal guard escalates below full escalation - a setting a load-aware policy also uses to resist a flooding attack that slips a malicious action past a fatigued reviewer. Agent oversight, framed this way, is not only a classification problem but a resource-allocation one: human attention is finite, and the guard's escalation policy spends it. We claim none of these mechanisms as novel - fatigue-aware learning-to-defer (FALCON), cost-sensitive deferral under workload constraints (DeCCaF), trajectory-level guarding, and reviewer-fatigue/flooding attacks are all prior art we cite. Our contribution is an open-source agent-oversight system that operationalizes and measures them in the LLM-agent action-gating setting, turning "is my guard good?" from a guess into a curve. The inverted-U and the flooding attack are modeling results that motivate a human study.

Flexible robotic automation requires systems that interpret operator intent, verify physical feasibility, and recover from execution failures across both the planning and execution stages. This paper proposes an agentic neuro-symbolic framework for human-in-the-loop industrial robotics, in which LLMs are used for tasks that require language understanding or contextual reasoning, while all verification, sequencing, and execution remain deterministic. The framework adapts the Planner-Generator-Evaluator (PGE) harness pattern from software engineering into a Specifier-Designer-Inspector (SDI) architecture for industrial robotics, combined with LangGraph-based dynamic routing for failure recovery. A two-tier recovery mechanism addresses structure-level replanning through context-aware orchestration and execution-level geometric failures through deterministic recovery skills. A Unity3D digital twin supports human inspection, modification, and re-verification prior to physical execution. Evaluated on natural-language commands across multiple difficulty levels against ten baselines, the proposed method achieves the highest task success. Ablation results confirm that structured command expansion, symbolic verification, selective LLM routing, and recovery skills are each individually necessary.

With the evolution of large foundation models (LFMs), data-driven autonomous driving has made significant strides. However, existing paradigms still face severe challenges in complex interaction and long-tail scenarios due to distribution shift and causal confusion. These limitations often result in a lack of human-level decision-making flexibility and safety in extreme conditions. To overcome this limitation, this paper proposes a Human-in-the-Loop Online Behavior Cloning frame work (HiL-OBC) for autonomous driving, which aims to deeply integrate the cross-modal perceptual capabilities of LFMs with the high-level driving intelligence of human experts. Specifically, HiL-OBC deployment is executed through three critical phases: policy initialization with human intervention, latent behavioral modeling with Bayesian policy adaptation, and online deploy ment and updates. Furthermore, we design a Multi-modal Online Behavior Cloning (MOBC) model, which optimizes the base driving policy online through a lightweight network architecture, a takeover trigger mechanism, and a multi-variant loss function, thereby enhancing the system's decision-making robustness in complex environments. We evaluated the HiL-OBC on the LangAuto-Human CARLA benchmark. Experimental results demonstrate that the driving policies optimized via the human-in-the-loop mechanism achieve substantial performance gains: the DS of StructNav, LFG, and LMDrive increased by 47.25%, 31.59%, and 32.12%, respectively, with a simultaneous of various experimental settings and key components highlights the advantages of human-in-the-loop learning in improving decision-making robustness and overall driving performance.

Software-in-the-loop (SIL) simulation is a cornerstone for the validation of modern automotive safety functions. However, many current frameworks utilize ideal sensing, which bypasses the functional insufficiencies of perception algorithms, leading to over-optimistic safety assessments. This paper proposes a perception-informed SIL testing methodology that bridges the gap between ground-truth simulation and real-world perception behavior. We present a framework for incorporating causal probabilistic models into standardized, scenario-based simulation toolchains, applicable to both Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and Autonomous Driving Systems (ADS). Our approach enables the systematic injection of realistic perception errors, such as loss of detection, sizing inaccuracies, and positioning offsets, derived from physical triggering conditions like fog, rain, and object-merging scenarios. By evaluating these ``faults'' within a standardized simulation environment, we demonstrate that perception-informed testing reveals latent operational risks that ideal SIL environments fail to capture, providing a scalable pathway for SOTIF (ISO 21448) validation.

Human-in-the-loop reinforcement learning (HIL-RL) improves sample efficiency in real-robot manipulation through online human intervention. However, successful trajectories may include suboptimal actions that deviate from the desired task-execution path and force human intervention. Existing HIL-RL methods typically apply the consistent credit assignment principle to all transitions, uniformly propagating discounted terminal rewards through suboptimal segments, ignoring the actual contribution of each transition to task success. This overestimates Q-values for critic learning and indirectly misguides actor updates toward suboptimal behavior patterns. To this end, we propose PACT, a Preference-calibrated Actor-Critic Training framework that leverages the implicit preference signals induced by intervention to perform credit reassignment on identified suboptimal segments while directly guiding policy training for unbiased critic-actor learning. Specifically, we first design a progress model that learns from human demonstration and identifies suboptimal segments for credit correction. Then, from the human action and resampled policy action at the intervention state, we build preference pairs to define a counterfactual advantage that penalizes Bellman targets of the identified suboptimal segment, enabling directional credit calibration. Moreover, we directly align the policy with human corrective actions in the bounded mean space, providing an additional signal beyond critic-guided updates. Across five real-robot manipulation tasks, PACT improves the average success rate by 24.5% and achieves 1.3 times faster convergence, thereby improving both RL sample efficiency and performance. Code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/HILRL-A1X-BC05.

Consumer-price measurement increasingly draws on alternative data sources -- scanner, web-scraped, and transaction/receipt data -- whose product descriptions are short, noisy, and carry no standard product code, so each item must first be mapped to a consumption classification (e.g., the UN COICOP scheme) before prices can be compared. This paper studies that mapping as a general, reproducible method. The pipeline is: (i) text normalization and tokenization of noisy item names; (ii) a prefix-tree (trie) rule-based pre-classifier driven by per-category key-phrases and stop-phrases; and (iii) a per-category binary confirmation model. For labels at scale we use a human-in-the-loop protocol in which annotators give a binary valid/reject judgment aggregated by a dynamically updated reliability weight; the model joins the same rule, enabling continual fine-tuning. On a reproducible synthetic benchmark of six COICOP-like categories, under one matched protocol, cheap models win and order-sensitive ones do not help: a character n-gram logistic regression tops every category (mean F1 = 0.997), word-order features add nothing, and small CNN/LSTM models are the weakest in this small-data regime. The trie alone admits only 32-50% of items, so the learned stage is necessary, and about 66 labels per category suffice. A Monte-Carlo study of the labeling protocol is self-critical: the reliability-weighted vote barely beats plain majority while Dawid-Skene recovers labels markedly better. No proprietary or production data are used; all code and synthetic data are released at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20909563

Diffusion policies have recently emerged as a powerful framework for robotic manipulation. However, like other behavior cloning methods, they remain vulnerable to distributional shift, often requiring human-in-the-loop interventions to correct failures during deployment. These interactions naturally provide paired supervision in the form of the robot's undesired actions and the human teacher's corrective actions. Yet existing data aggregation pipelines and standard behavior cloning losses largely ignore this negative signal from undesired actions, leading to overfitting to teacher's actions and an increasing reliance on costly expert data. To address this limitation, we propose Set-Supervised Diffusion Policy (SDP), a novel learning framework that utilizes contrastive action-chunk data to train diffusion policies from human corrections. From paired positive and negative action-chunks, SDP constructs a set of desired action-chunks and designs a training pipeline that encourages the diffusion policy to align with the set. Through extensive experiments across multiple robotic manipulation tasks, we demonstrate that SDP consistently improves policy performance, with particularly strong gains in robustness to noisy data. Moreover, SDP induces high-quality aggregated datasets, enabling more efficient and reliable policy learning from human-in-the-loop corrections. Our code is available at https://set-supervised-diffusion-policy.github.io/.

Image quality in modern imaging systems emerges from the coupled effects of the sensor, optics, and computational reconstruction. Ultra-thin metalenses offer a path toward substantial miniaturization of optical modules, but practical designs often exhibit pronounced chromatic and field-dependent aberrations that necessitate computational reconstruction. In current metalens pipelines, reconstruction models are commonly trained and selected using distortion-based fidelity objectives, such as PSNR, yet these proxies can be weakly correlated with human preference and downstream utility, reflecting the well-known perception--distortion trade-off. We introduce MetaRanker, a human-in-the-loop active ranking framework that formalizes metalens image quality in terms of semantic interpretability, defined as the degree to which humans can reliably recognize objects and structures in the presence of optical artifacts. MetaRanker combines a probabilistic preference model with uncertainty-aware query selection, and leverages vision--language models to provide lightweight semantic priors. Importantly, these priors are used only to guide the sampling of informative comparisons; human judgments remain the primary supervision signal throughout. Across real-world and synthetic metalens datasets with distinct degradation profiles, MetaRanker produces rankings that align most closely with human assessments, while reducing the number of pairwise annotations required by approximately 80% relative to exhaustive pairwise evaluation. Finally, we show that standard image quality assessment metrics exhibit limited alignment with human interpretability in the metalens domain, positioning MetaRanker as a practical step toward perceptually grounded metalens evaluation and co-design.

Learning from demonstrations is effective for robotic manipulation, but collecting sufficient task-specific data remains a major bottleneck. Under distribution shift, small errors compound, performance degrades, and expert time is often spent on redundant, low-value corrections instead of the few critical failure cases. We present VR-DAgger, a human-in-the-loop framework centered on an immersive VR application for dexterous teleoperation, demonstration collection, and selective policy correction. The VR client provides intuitive hand control with synchronized scene visualization, while a backend workstation runs simulation and learning, enabling autonomous rollouts without continuous operator oversight. We use Monte Carlo (MC) dropout to score uncertainty during Isaac Lab rollouts of a diffusion policy and select informative failure segments for correction. These segments are replayed in VR as clips, where the operator selectively labels and corrects the policy's behavior, concentrating supervision where uncertainty is highest without full-rollout monitoring or a separate intervention classifier. We evaluate on three dexterous manipulation tasks (Pan pick-and-place, Drawer opening, Valve turning) with a 10-DoF XHand under standard and challenging initial configurations. Active labeling consistently improves over behavioral cloning across all tasks, with gains of up to 23 percentage points. Compared to unguided human-in-the-loop inspection, VR-DAgger reduces per-sample collection time by approximately 40% by focusing review on selected segments rather than full rollouts.

Evaluating structured-information extraction from historical documents at scale requires high-precision ground-truth annotations, yet traditional manual labeling is expensive and fully automated pipelines built on large language models are prone to hallucination. We propose Double Triangle Annotation, a two-layer human-in-the-loop framework that leverages cross-model consensus to automate the majority of annotation work while ensuring high-precision outputs. In the first layer, two architecturally independent Multimodal Large Language Models annotate each document in parallel; when they agree, the label is auto-accepted, and disagreements are routed to a human jury. A second layer cross-checks two such systems against each other, escalating residual conflicts to a domain expert. The framework rests on a single assumption -- error independence between models -- requires no distributional priors or task-specific calibration, and becomes more autonomous as model capability improves. On the Guides Rosenwald, a corpus of French medical directories spanning 1887-1906, the framework achieves a final Word Error Rate of 0.003. Applied at scale, model consensus auto-accepts over 85% of 13,595 fields. We release the resulting benchmark -- the first structured-extraction ground truth for the Rosenwald Guides -- to support future work on historical document processing.

This paper presents CyBOKClaw, an interpretable human-in-the-loop retrieval framework for mapping cybersecurity keywords or phrases (KWoPs) to the Cyber Security Body of Knowledge (CyBOK). Rather than treating the task as strict exact classification, the framework is designed as a top-k candidate generator for expert review. It combines query normalization, curated term expansion, concept-level boosts, topic-description enrichment, and domain-sensitive ranking rules. Because educational KWoPs are often broad, ambiguous, and only approximately aligned with CyBOK terminology, strict exact matching provides only a partial account of practical utility. We therefore evaluate the framework using both structural retrieval metrics and an expert-guided top-5 usefulness metric, ECA-5 (Exact or Closest Acceptable Match at top-5), which records whether the returned candidates contain at least one mapping that an expert would judge exact or accept as the nearest practical CyBOK placement. On the development dataset, CyBOKClaw achieves 64.73% EXA-5 (Exact Match at top-5), 84.18% structural semantic alignment, and 91.88% ECA-5; on the validation dataset, it achieves 81.19% EXA-5, 93.32% structural semantic alignment, and 98.00% ECA-5. These results show that expert-guided top-k usefulness provides a more faithful account of practical CyBOK mapping utility than exact structural matching alone, and that CyBOKClaw is effective as a CyBOK-specific expert-support retrieval system.

Dynamic pricing in short-term rental (STR) markets presents a distinctive challenge for online learning algorithms: pricing decisions carry significant financial risk, operators require explainability, and market feedback is sparse (one booking outcome per listed night). We introduce the Human-in-the-Loop Gated Bandit (HITL-GB) framework, in which a contextual bandit algorithm generates price recommendations but a human agent retains authority to accept, modify, or reject each recommendation before it is applied. We show that under this approval constraint, historical pricing data -- collected under a prior deterministic policy -- is structurally equivalent to on-policy warm-up data for initialising the bandit's posterior, bypassing the weeks-to-months cold-start period that renders pure online bandit learning impractical in sparse-feedback markets. We formalise the approval-gated reward signal, derive a regularised ridge-regression warm-up procedure from historical episodes, and validate the approach on real STR production data (anonymised urban market, 2 rooms, April 2022 -- April 2026, 1,461 nightly pricing episodes). Our warm-up procedure compresses effective cold-start from ~150 episodes to ~30 episodes when initialising agents from the Hierarchical Factored Thompson Sampling (HF-TS) family. We further argue that the structural equivalence result is domain-agnostic: any high-stakes domain where human approval is legally or operationally required -- including clinical drug dosing, credit origination, content moderation, and radiological diagnosis -- satisfies the same conditions and benefits from the same warm-up strategy. In regulated industries, mandatory human oversight is thus a statistical asset rather than a deployment constraint.

Ventilator decision support requires sequential decisions that track evolving physiology and disease trajectories while respecting safety boundaries and clinician specific tuning styles. Rule based approaches rarely generalize personalization, and end to end reinforcement learning or single large language model systems remain difficult to control and audit. We propose the Ventilator Decision Support System (VDSS), a human in the loop multi agent framework that coordinates modular decision components through contract driven structured interfaces and produces traceable evidence for review. VDSS performs online preference adaptation with a contextual bandit, updating clinician specific preferences from the final accepted decision at each adjustment cycle and using them to guide subsequent recommendations. Structured rejection feedback triggers targeted replanning to reduce unproductive iterations and improve interaction stability. Retrospective ICU trajectory replay with expert review indicates higher recommendation acceptability and fewer interaction rounds to reach an acceptable plan, supporting clinically deployable human AI collaboration.

Autonomous manipulation systems have achieved remarkable capabilities, yet the integration of human expertise with diffusion-based policies in shared control remains relatively unexplored. In this paper, we propose Human-In-The-Loop Diffusion (HITL-D), a shared control framework that enhances user performance in multi-step, insertion, and fine manipulation tasks. HITL-D leverages a novel combination of diffusion-based policies and human control to provide autonomous end effector orientation updates conditioned on a scene point cloud and the Cartesian position of the end effector. This approach reduces the number of joystick control axes required, thereby lowering mental workload. In a multi-task user study with 12 participants, HITL-D reduced average task completion times by 40%, decreased perceived workload by 37%, and improved Likert-scale ratings for independence, intuitiveness, and confidence compared to traditional teleoperation methods. These results demonstrate that HITL-D effectively integrates human expertise with autonomous assistance, improving both objective and subjective aspects of teleoperation.

Enterprise agents are increasingly expected to operate autonomously across tools and interfaces, yet production deployments require governance by construction. Systems must specify which actions are allowed, when human oversight is required, and what information may be exposed, without rebuilding the agent for each domain. This demo presents CUGA's policy system, a modular policy-as-code layer that composes with a generalist LLM agent to deliver predictable, auditable, and compliance-aware behavior in compound workflows without model fine-tuning. We present a runtime governance architecture that enforces policy interventions at every critical stage of execution. Rather than passively constraining behavior, policies intercept the agent at five structural checkpoints: upstream of planning (Intent Guard), within the system prompt to steer reasoning (Playbook), at the tool-call boundary to enforce proper usage (Tool Guide), outside the reasoning loop as a Human-in-the-Loop gate for high-risk actions (Tool Approvals), and at the output stage to filter and structure the final response (Output Formatter). Together, these stages embed governance continuously across the agent's execution pipeline rather than treating it as an afterthought. Using a healthcare scenario and a multi-layered enforcement intervention, the demo shows dynamic playbook injection for structured tool-sequence enforcement, intent guards that block malicious or accidental harmful requests, and human-in-the-loop tool approval checkpoints for potentially destructive actions. The artifact illustrates how typed governance primitives enable faster, safer deployment of enterprise agentic systems while improving policy adherence and execution consistency.

Deep-learning pipelines for microscopy image classification often require expensive, labor- and time-intensive expert annotation to produce high-quality ground truth for training. Recent work has shown that prompt tuning of vision-language models (VLMs) can reduce manual annotation by constructing a small prompt set of expert-verified image-caption exemplars that is reused as few-shot context to classify all remaining images at inference time. To further reduce effort, the VLM can draft captions for candidate exemplars, which experts then verify and lightly edit instead of writing text de novo. However, two practical questions remain unaddressed: (1) which unlabeled images should be prioritized for verification, and (2) how many verified exemplars are needed to reach a performance target. In this work, we address these questions by formulating prompt-set construction as a target-driven active learning problem that prioritizes which images to annotate. We study three complementary selection criteria under strict low-resource constraints with small unlabeled pools. Experiments show that our methods reach the target performance with substantially fewer expert-verified images than random selection, achieving 100% test accuracy with as few as 20 annotated images on average. More broadly, our human-in-the-loop framework demonstrates a human-centered use of generative AI in biomedical image analysis, where experts remain actively involved in verifying and refining model output while significantly reducing annotation cost. Code and data will be publicly available.

Document processing automation remains a critical challenge in enterprise environments, where traditional manual approaches are labor-intensive and error-prone. We present MADP, a multi-agent architecture that addresses the challenge of automating document processing in enterprise settings by combining deep learning-based classification and parsing with large language model extraction, while maintaining accuracy through selective human validation. Our system integrates five specialized agents--Classificator, Splitter, Parser, Extraction, and Validator--with a Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) mechanism and a novel Prompt Fine Tuning with Feedback Inheritance (PFTFI) approach. The operational analysis on a production use-case scenario of 100,000 invoices per year indicates a potential reduction of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) requirements by approximately 70%. Production deployment on 955 real-world documents processed through January 2026 achieves a 97.0% full-pipeline automation rate, with only 3% requiring non-AI fallback. Ablation evaluation on a stratified 100-document subset (5 documents per each of 20 supplier/document-type categories) demonstrates that the full MADP configuration with Human-in-the-Loop supervision attains 98.5% document-level accuracy. Additionally, we present a comprehensive sustainability analysis showing that our hybrid AI+HITL approach reduces CO2 emissions by 69%, energy consumption by 69%, and water usage by 63% compared to traditional manual processing. Benchmark comparisons of multiple LLM backends (Granite-Docling, Mistral-Small, DeepSeek-OCR) provide practical insights for deployment in production environments.

Editors and reviewers are expected to ensure that manuscripts cite relevant, accurate, current, and ethically appropriate literature, yet manuscript-level citation auditing remains largely manual, fragmented, and difficult to scale. Citation context, metadata quality, self-citation patterns, and bibliographic integrity all affect whether a reference appropriately supports a local claim. We present CitePrism, a transparent hybrid decision-support framework for editorial citation auditing that combines LLM-assisted contextual reasoning, embedding-based semantic similarity, metadata verification, integrity-oriented flags, and human-in-the-loop analyst review. CitePrism extracts citation neighborhoods, enriches reference metadata, computes fused relevance scores, surfaces metadata and self-citation review prompts, and supports configurable threshold-based triage. In a preliminary validation on a single case-study manuscript with 104 references from pavement engineering, agreement with human binary relevance labels reached Cohen's kappa = 0.429. At operating threshold tau = 17, CitePrism flagged all human-labeled irrelevant citations, while also producing false positives requiring analyst review. These results suggest that CitePrism may support conservative editorial screening and citation-quality triage, but they do not establish general editorial performance. CitePrism is intended as pilot-stage decision support, not as an autonomous misconduct detector or automated editorial decision system. Broader validation across manuscripts, domains, annotators, baselines, and deployment settings is required before operational use.

Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models are prone to compounding errors in dexterous manipulation, where high-dimensional action spaces and contact-rich dynamics amplify small policy deviations over long horizons. While Interactive Imitation Learning (IIL) can refine policies through human correction data, applying it to high-degree-of-freedom (DoF) robotic hands remains challenging due to a command mismatch between human teleoperation and policy execution at the intervention moment, which causes abrupt robot-hand configuration changes, or "gesture jumps". We present Hand-in-the-Loop (HandITL), a seamless human-in-the-loop intervention method that blends human corrective intent with autonomous policy execution to avoid gesture jumps during bimanual dexterous manipulation. Compared with taking over control using direct teleoperation, HandITL reduces intervention jitter by 99.8% and preserves robust post-intervention manipulation, reducing grasp failures by 87.5% and mean completion time by 19.1%. We validate HandITL on tasks requiring bimanual coordination, tool use, and fine-grained long-horizon manipulation. When used to collect correction data for policy refinement, HandITL yields policies that outperform those trained with standard teleoperation data by 19% on average across three long-horizon dexterous tasks.

Virtual Cell Modeling (VCM) requires models that not only predict perturbation responses, but also support targeted revision when predictions fail. Current LLM-assisted modeling workflows face a refinement-routing problem: prediction discrepancies are observed through executable implementations, but the relevant revision may involve the modeling assumption, representation design, implementation, or task constraint. Without structured feedback propagation across these levels, iterative refinement may repair code while failing to revise the assumption responsible for the discrepancy. We propose CellScientist, a dual-space hierarchical framework that couples a high-level hypothesis space with a low-level executable implementation space. CellScientist represents modeling decisions as structured states, realizes them as admissible programs under task and interface constraints, and routes execution discrepancies back to targeted hypothesis or implementation updates. This enables a closed Hypothesis -> Implementation -> Hypothesis loop where failures become structured signals for model refinement rather than debugging events. Across morphology and transcriptomic benchmarks, with additional single-cell perturbation evaluations, the final executable models selected by CellScientist improve over reference baselines under fixed split and evaluation protocols, while the workflow produces auditable refinement traces.

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have significantly improved language-driven 3D content generation, but most existing approaches still treat scene generation and user interaction as separate processes, limiting the adaptability and immersive potential of interactive multimedia systems. This paper presents a unified framework that closes the loop between language-driven 3D scene generation and immersive user interaction. Given natural language instructions, the system first constructs structured scene representations using LLMs, and then optimizes spatial layouts via reinforcement learning under geometric and semantic constraints. The generated environments are deployed in a virtual reality setting to facilitate HRI-in-the-loop, where user interactions provide continuous feedback to align generated content with human perception and usability. By tightly coupling generation and interaction, the proposed framework enables more responsive, adaptive, and realistic multimedia experiences. Experiments on the ALFRED benchmark demonstrate state-of-the-art performance in task-based scene generation. Furthermore, qualitative results and user studies show consistent improvements in immersion, interaction quality, and task efficiency, highlighting the importance of closed-loop integration of generation and interaction for next-generation multimedia systems. Our project page can be found at https://proj-showcase.github.io/h3ds/.

This paper presents the Personalized Thinking Model (PTM), a hierarchical and interpretable learner representation designed for AI supported education. PTM organizes evidence from learner journals into a five-layer structure covering behavioral instances, behavioral patterns, cognitive routines, metacognitive tendencies, and self-system values. PTM is grounded in Marzano's New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives and tries to clone learner's thinking model and build cognitive twin. It was constructed using a pipeline that combines large language model inference (Gemini 2.5 Pro), sentence embeddings, dimensionality reduction, and consensus clustering. This paper evaluates PTM fidelity through three methods applied to 40 participants in a seven-week study. First, automatic evaluation using atomic information point matching yielded an overall F1 score of 74.57% before human-in-the-loop (HITL) refinement and 75.48% after refinement. Second, user evaluation using a Likert scale produced mean ratings of 4.26 and 4.30 on a five-point scale for pre and post-HITL conditions respectively. Third, semantic alignment verification showed that topic coherence increased from 0.436 at the behavioral layer to 0.626 at the core value layer, while lexical overlap with journal vocabulary decreased from 0.114 to 0.007 across those same layers. These results suggest that the PTM produces outputs with acceptable fidelity, was generally perceived by users as reflecting their thinking, and showed a pattern consistent with semantic abstraction across layers.

Self-adaptive robots operate in dynamic, unpredictable environments where unaddressed uncertainties can lead to safety violations and operational failures. However, systematically identifying and analyzing these uncertainties, including their sources, impacts, and mitigation strategies, remains a significant challenge given the inherent complexity of real-world environments, dynamic robotic behavior, and the rapid evolution of robotic technologies. To address this, we introduce RoboULM, a human-in-the-loop methodology and tool that supports practitioners in systematically exploring uncertainties at the design stage using large language models (LLMs). Moreover, we present an uncertainty taxonomy that provides a detailed catalog of uncertainties in self-adaptive robots. We evaluated RoboULM with 16 practitioners from four industrial use cases. The results show that RoboULM was perceived as both useful and easy to understand, with the participants particularly valuing structured prompting and iterative refinement support. These findings demonstrate the potential of RoboULM as a viable solution for systematic uncertainty analysis in complex robots.

Prior studies report that partial driving automation can increase the cognitive demands on human drivers. This effect largely arises from human drivers' lack of transparent insight into the vehicle's intentions and decision logic, as well as from automated systems' limited awareness of the driver's dynamic state and preferences. This bidirectional misalignment undermines shared situational awareness and exacerbates coordination failures in human-vehicle interaction. To address these limitations, we argue for a paradigm shift that elevates the human role from passive supervisor to active manager. We introduce the Mediator-in-the-Loop-Driving (MILD) system, based on an agentic system architecture to facilitate synergistic human-vehicle collaboration. MILD integrates a perception agent for joint in-cabin and out-of-cabin understanding with a lightweight strategy agent that generates compliant and explainable action suggestions. To ensure these strategies are strictly aligned with safety regulations and human values, we develop Evidence- and Constraint-weighted Policy Optimization (ECPO). ECPO leverages automatic validators to steer the agent toward behaviors that are not only accurate but also structurally complete, substantiated by evidence, and free from constraint violations. Furthermore, a retrieval-augmented generation module dynamically incorporates constraints from traffic regulations, speed recommendations, and driver preferences into the decision loop. Field experiments across three open datasets demonstrate that MILD consistently outperforms baselines in both perception accuracy and strategy quality under auditable offline metrics, and yields higher human-rated policy adequacy, comfort, and explanation than baselines. This work offers a practical pathway for building auditable and aligned agents for human-vehicle collaborative driving.

Agent skills - structured packages of instructions, scripts, and references that augment a large language model (LLM) without modifying the model itself - have moved from convenience to first-class deployment artifact. The runtime that loads them inherits the same problem package managers and operating systems have always faced: a piece of content claims a behavior; the runtime must decide whether to believe it. We argue this paper's central thesis up front: a skill is untrusted code until it is verified, and the runtime that loads it must enforce that default rather than infer trust from a signature, a clearance, or a registry of origin. Without skill verification, a human-in-the-loop (HITL) gate must fire on every irreversible call - which is operationally untenable and degrades into rubber-stamping at any non-trivial scale. With skill verification treated as a separate, gated process, HITL fires only for what is unverified, and the system becomes sustainable. We give a trust schema that includes an explicit verification level on every skill manifest; a capability gate whose HITL policy is a function of that verification level; a biconditional correctness criterion that any candidate verification procedure must satisfy on an adversarial-ensemble exercise; and a portable runtime profile with ten normative guidelines abstracted from a working open-source reference implementation. The contribution is harness- and model-agnostic; nothing here requires retraining, fine-tuning, or proprietary infrastructure.

As generative and agentic AI becomes embedded in everyday products, practitioners face a persistent challenge: how to design human-AI coordination -- the ongoing mutual adjustment between users and AI systems as mediate through interfaces-that supports usability, trust, and safety. Existing resources offer high-level principles ("be transparent," "maintain user control") or low-level UI patterns, but there is a lack of mid-level design knowledge bridging the two. Through landscape and artifact analysis of 60 commercial AI applications, we introduce a framework defining human-AI coordination as the interplay of three dimensions: salience (how prominently AI is presented), involvement (what users can do to engage AI), and activity (what AI actually does). We contribute mid-level tools including coordination zones (done-for-me, done-under-me, done-with-me, done-without-me), an input taxonomy (prompted, sparked, inferred, layered), coordination curves for mapping user journeys, and design patterns demonstrating the generative capacity of the framework. The framework can be applied generatively to design experiences, analytically to evaluate existing ones, and communicatively to articulate ideas across stakeholders.

An agent skill is a configuration package that equips an LLM-driven agent with a concrete capability, such as reading email, executing shell commands, or signing blockchain transactions. Each skill is a hybrid artifact-a structured half declares executable interfaces, while a prose half dictates when and how those interfaces fire-and the prose is reinterpreted probabilistically on every invocation. Conventional static analyzers parse the structured half but ignore the prose; LLM-based tools read the prose but cannot reproducibly prove that a tainted input reaches a high-impact sink. We present Semia, a static auditor for agent skills. Semia lifts each skill into the Skill Description Language (SDL), a Datalog fact base that captures LLM-triggered actions, prose-defined conditions, and human-in-the-loop checkpoints. Synthesizing a fact base that is both structurally sound and semantically faithful to the original prose is the central challenge; we address it with Constraint-Guided Representation Synthesis (CGRS), a propose-verify-evaluate loop that refines LLM candidates until convergence. Security properties (e.g., indirect injection, secret leakage, confused deputies, unguarded sinks, etc.) over an agent skill can then be reduced to Datalog reachability queries. We evaluate Semia on 13,728 real-world skills from public marketplaces. Semia renders all of them auditable and finds that more than half carry at least one critical semantic risk. On a stratified sample of 541 expert-labeled skills, Semia achieves 97.7% recall and an F1 of 90.6%, substantially outperforming signature-based scanners and LLM baselines.

Automatic Short Answer Grading (ASAG) with generative large language models (LLMs) has recently demonstrated strong performance without task-specific fine-tuning, while also enabling the generation of synthetic feedback for educational assessment. Despite these advances, LLM-based grading remains imperfect, making reliable confidence estimates essential for safe and effective human-AI collaboration in educational decision-making. In this work, we investigate confidence estimation for ASAG with LLMs by jointly considering model-based confidence signals and dataset-derived uncertainty. We systematically compare three model-based confidence estimation strategies, namely verbalizing, latent, and consistency-based confidence estimation, and show that model-based confidence alone is insufficient to reliably capture uncertainty in ASAG. To address this limitation, we propose a hybrid confidence framework that integrates model-based confidence signals with an explicit estimate of dataset-derived aleatoric uncertainty. Aleatoric uncertainty is operationalized by clustering semantically embedded student responses and quantifying within-cluster heterogeneity. Our results demonstrate that the proposed hybrid confidence measure yields more reliable confidence estimates and improves selective grading performance compared to single-source approaches. Overall, this work advances confidence-aware LLM-based grading for human-in-the-loop assessment, supporting more trustworthy AI-assisted educational assessment systems.

As Competency-Based Education (CBE) is gaining traction around the world, the shift from marks-based assessment to qualitative competency mapping is a manual challenge for educators. This paper tackles the bottleneck issue by suggesting a "Human-in-the-Loop" benchmarking framework to assess the effectiveness of multiple LLMs in automating secondary-level mathematics assessment. Based on the Grade 10 Optional Mathematics curriculum in Nepal, we created a multi-dimensional rubric for four topics and four cross-cutting competencies: Comprehension, Knowledge, Operational Fluency, and Behavior and Correlation. The multi-provider ensemble, consisted of open-weight models -- Eagle (Llama 3.1-8B) and Orion (Llama 3.3-70B) -- and proprietary frontier models Nova (Gemini 2.5 Flash) and Lyra (Gemini 3 Pro), was benchmarked against a ground truth defined by two senior mathematics faculty members (kappa_w = 0.8652). The findings show a marked "Architecture-compatibility gap". Although the Gemini-based Mixture-of-Experts (Sparse MoE) models achieved "Fair Agreement" (kappa_w ~ 0.38), the larger Orion (70B) model exhibited "No Agreement" (kappa_w = -0.0261), suggesting that architectural compliance with instruction constraints outweighs the scale of raw parameters in rubric-constrained tasks. We conclude that while LLMs are not yet suitable for autonomous certification, they provide high-value assistive support for preliminary evidence extraction within a "Human-in-the-Loop" framework.

Target Safety Assessment (TSA) requires systematic integration of genetic, transcriptomic, target homology, pharmacological, and clinical data to evaluate potential safety liabilities of therapeutic targets. This process is labor-intensive and expert-dependent, posing challenges in scalability and reproducibility. We present TSAssistant, a human-in-the-loop multi-agent framework that decomposes TSA report generation into a workflow of specialized subagents: Research Subagents that each ground and cite a single TSA domain, and Synthesis Subagents that integrate findings across domains. Subagents retrieve and synthesize evidence from curated biomedical sources through standardized tool interfaces and produce individually citable, evidence-grounded sections, with behavior shaped by a hierarchical instruction architecture that separates coordination logic from domain expertise and user intent. To complement these soft constraints, programmatic execution hooks and persistent memory stores enforce hard constraints across the workflow, while an interactive refinement loop allows experts to review and revise individual sections with full conversational context preserved across iterations. Rather than a single holistic comparison, we decompose report quality into reproducibility, evidential grounding, task-level accuracy, and controllability under expert oversight, finding high reproducibility and grounding, substantial agreement with the human reference, and net-positive expert-driven refinement.

AI agents are increasingly deployed to execute tasks and make decisions within agentic workflows, introducing new requirements for safe and controlled autonomy. Prior work has established the importance of human oversight for ensuring transparency, accountability, and trustworthiness in such systems. However, existing implementations of Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) mechanisms are typically embedded within application logic, limiting reuse, consistency, and scalability across multi-agent environments. This paper presents a decoupled HITL system architecture that treats human oversight as an independent system component within the agent operating environment. The proposed design separates human interaction management from application workflows through explicit interfaces and a structured execution model. In addition, a design framework is introduced to formalize HITL integration along four dimensions: intervention conditions, role resolution, interaction semantics, and communication channel. This framework enables selective and context-aware human involvement while maintaining system-level consistency. The approach supports alignment with emerging agent communication protocols, allowing HITL to be implemented as a protocol-level concern. By externalizing HITL and structuring its integration, the system provides a foundation for scalable governance and progressive autonomy in agentic workflows.

Team-level failure in nuclear control rooms arises not from isolated operator error, but from emergent interaction dynamics, delayed diagnosis, suppressed dissent, and authority-driven error propagation, that conventional human reliability analysis methods are structurally unable to model. This study introduces TEAM-SimHRA, a multi-agent large language model simulation framework that reconceptualizes human reliability as an interaction-driven emergent property of control room teams rather than a static individual attribute. Unlike existing approaches that assign fixed error probabilities to predefined tasks, TEAM-SimHRA reproduces collective cognition, role-conditioned authority dynamics, and real-time communication suppression across temporally evolving accident progressions. Validated against the Three Mile Island (1979) and Chernobyl (1986) accidents, the two most extensively documented nuclear team failures , the framework achieves face-validity pass rates of 43.5% and 52.6% respectively, reproducing near-historical decision delay (134.8 vs. 138 min), perfect communication suppression stability, and full authority pressure cascade at historically accurate propagation depth. These results demonstrate that multi-agent simulation can extract quantitative team-level reliability indicators that are inaccessible to traditional methods, opening a viable path toward simulation-based dynamic probabilistic risk assessment for safety-critical sociotechnical systems.

This paper introduces a multi-agent framework guided by Large Language Models (LLMs) to assist in the early stages of engineering design, a phase often characterized by vast parameter spaces and inherent uncertainty. Operating under a human-in-the-loop paradigm and demonstrated on the canonical problem of aerodynamic airfoil design, the framework employs a team of specialized agents: a Coding Assistant, a Design Agent, a Systems Engineering Agent, and an Analyst Agent - all coordinated by a human Manager. Integrated within a set-based design philosophy, the process begins with a collaborative phase where the Manager and Coding Assistant develop a suite of validated tools, after which the agents execute a structured workflow to systematically explore and prune a large set of initial design candidates. A key contribution of this work is the explicit integration of formal risk management, employing the Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) as a quantitative metric to filter designs that exhibit a high probability of failing to meet performance requirements, specifically the target coefficient of lift. The framework automates labor-intensive initial exploration through a global sensitivity analysis conducted by the Analyst agent, which generates actionable heuristics to guide the other agents. The process culminates by presenting the human Manager with a curated final set of promising design candidates, augmented with high-fidelity Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations. This approach effectively leverages AI to handle high-volume analytical tasks, thereby enhancing the decision-making capability of the human expert in selecting the final, risk-assessed design.

Building on recent advances in AI, hybrid decision making (HDM) holds the promise of improving human decision quality and reducing cognitive load. We work in the context of learning to guide (LtG), a recently proposed HDM framework in which the human is always responsible for the final decision: rather than suggesting decisions, in LtG the AI supplies (textual) guidance useful for facilitating decision making. One limiting factor of existing approaches is that their guidance compounds information about all possible outcomes, and as a result it can be difficult to digest. We address this issue by introducing ConfGuide, a novel LtG approach that generates more succinct and targeted guidance. To this end, it employs conformal risk control to select a set of outcomes, ensuring a cap on the false negative rate. We demonstrate our approach on a real-world multi-label medical diagnosis task. Our empirical evaluation highlights the promise of ConfGuide.

Vibe coding inherently assumes iterative refinement of LLM-generated code through feedback loops. While effective for conventional software tasks, its reliability in runtime-adaptive systems is unclear -- especially when generated code is not manually inspected. This paper studies feedback-based automated verification of LLM-generated adaptation managers in Collective Adaptive Systems (CAS). We focus on the key challenges of verification in the loop: how to detect failures of generated code at runtime and how to report them precisely enough for an LLM to fix them. We combine the adaptation loop with a vibe-coding feedback loop where correctness is checked against (i) generic architectural constraints and (ii) functional constraints formalized in Functional Constraints Logic (FCL), a novel first-order temporal logic over potentially finite traces. Conducting the Dragon Hunt CAS case study, we show that fine-grained constraint violations provide actionable feedback that typically yields a valid adaptation manager within a few iterations, while simple coarse metric-based feedback often stalls. Our findings suggest that feedback precision is the dominant factor for reliable vibe coding in systems designed by domain experts with no programming skills, thereby obviating the need for human code inspection.

We study the overall process of automatic formalization of GDPR provisions using large language models, within a human-in-the-loop verification framework. Rather than aiming for full autonomy, we adopt a role-specialized workflow in which LLM-based AI components, operating in a multi-agent setting with iterative feedback, generate legal scenarios, formal rules, and atomic facts. This is coupled with independent verification modules which include human reviewers' assessment of representational, logical, and legal correctness. Using this approach, we construct a high-quality dataset to be used for GDPR auto-formalization, and analyze both successful and problematic cases. Our results show that structured verification and targeted human oversight are essential for reliable legal formalization, especially in the presence of legal nuance and context-sensitive reasoning.

Integrating symbolic constraints into deep learning models could make them more robust, interpretable, and data-efficient. Still, it remains a time-consuming and challenging task. Existing frameworks like DomiKnowS help this integration by providing a high-level declarative programming interface, but they still assume the user is proficient with the library's specific syntax. We propose AgenticDomiKnowS (ADS) to eliminate this dependency. ADS translates free-form task descriptions into a complete DomiKnowS program using an agentic workflow that creates and tests each DomiKnowS component separately. The workflow supports optional human-in-the-loop intervention, enabling users familiar with DomiKnowS to refine intermediate outputs. We show how ADS enables experienced DomiKnowS users and non-users alike to construct complete neuro-symbolic programs in 10-15 minutes, whereas manually coding even a component of DomiKnowS takes an hour. Access the UI at https://hlr-demo.egr.msu.edu/.

Large language models (LLMs) show strong reasoning via chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting, but the process is opaque, which makes verification, debugging, and control difficult in high-stakes settings. We present Vis-CoT, a human-in-the-loop framework that converts linear CoT text into an interactive reasoning graph. Users can visualize the logical flow, identify flawed steps, and intervene by pruning incorrect paths and grafting new, user-defined premises. This shifts interaction from passive observation to active collaboration, steering models toward more accurate and trustworthy conclusions. Across GSM8K and StrategyQA, Vis-CoT improves final-answer accuracy by up to 24 percentage points over non-interactive baselines. A user study also shows large gains in perceived usability and trust. Vis-CoT points to a practical path for more reliable, understandable, and collaborative reasoning by combining LLMs with targeted human oversight.

Machine Learning (ML) has become central to Autonomous Vehicles (AVs), supporting perception, prediction, planning, control, and decision-making in dynamic environments. However, achieving full autonomy in cluttered and complex scenarios, such as intricate intersections, diverse scenes, varied trajectories, and complex missions, remains challenging; moreover, data labeling is still a major bottleneck. These limitations motivate Human-in-the-Loop Machine Learning (HITL-ML), in which human input is incorporated through validation, annotation, task organization, reward design, action correction, preference feedback, and supervisory intervention. To advance safe and ethical autonomy, this paper presents a tutorial survey of HITL-ML for AVs, focusing on Curriculum Learning (CL), Human-in-the-Loop Reinforcement Learning (HITL-RL), Human-in-the-Loop Large Language Models (HITL-LLMs), Active Learning (AL), and ethical principles. We first review CL methods that structure training from simple to complex tasks, covering navigation, path planning, obstacle avoidance, data collection, landing, intersection handling, motion planning, and UAV swarm coordination. We then examine HITL-RL through reward shaping, action injection, demonstrations, preference-based feedback, and interactive learning, emphasizing improved learning efficiency, safer policy exploration, and real-time intervention. Next, we review HITL-LLM through collaboration and oversight and specify key challenges. After that, we discuss AL for perception, anomaly detection, semantic mapping, object detection, vehicle recognition, and security-related classification. Ethical principles are reviewed as technical requirements for transparency, accountability, human oversight, safety, security, regulatory compliance, and reliability of human input.