Writing involves diverse cognitive activities, from ideation to revision, and writers' needs vary across individuals and moments. Proactive AI promises to provide the right support at the right time, yet existing proactive tools largely focus on generic textual assistance, such as autocomplete. This paper studies the design space of proactive thought partners: AI agents that proactively offer customizable, higher-level cognitive support during writing. We instantiated this concept in a technology probe and deployed it with 16 participants for one week. The probe allows users to create partners by configuring their roles and proactivity. As users write, relevant partners take the initiative at appropriate moments to offer suggestions. Our findings show that participants configured proactive support through prospective planning, used suggestions for both idea generation and self-monitoring, and valued lightweight visual representations alongside non-directive rhetorical framing for non-intrusive interventions. We derive implications for designing proactive writing assistants around customization, timing, engagement, and representation.
Satwik Ram Kodandaram, Monalika Padma Reddy, Xiaojun Bi +3cs.HC cs.AI
Computer-use agents are emerging as a paradigm for agentic human-AI interaction, combining language reasoning with multi-modal interface grounding to operate GUIs. Yet their effectiveness for blind screen-reader users in real-world desktop workflows remains unclear. We present a three-week diary study with 8 blind users using OLLA, a screen-reader-accessible CUA prototype, collecting 1,258 commands across 12 applications with screenshots, UI trees, model responses, and action traces. We evaluate GPT-5 during deployment and re-execute the same commands with four additional models. GPT-5 achieved the highest success rate at 52.5%. Trace analysis reveals grounding, planning, constraint-tracking, and termination failures, while interviews reveal beyond-automation needs.
Plan Modes have become standard features in agentic programming tools, allowing users to gain transparency and control by working with the agent to develop a plan before task execution. However, it remains unclear whether the benefits of this feature translate to end-user programming environments such as spreadsheets. Since spreadsheet programmers tend to work iteratively and care less about technical correctness, upfront planning may not fit into their workflows as easily. In this paper, we build a prototype of a Plan Mode for spreadsheet programming and evaluate it against a non-planning baseline through a within-subjects user study (N=24). We found that despite similar task outcomes with both tools, using Plan Mode led to a reduction in refinement and a better perception of the tool across dimensions of creativity support and human-machine collaboration. We discuss the implications of these results for the future design of Plan Modes, and for the broader role of human-AI planning in end-user programming.
Recent advances in LLMs and existing work on programming by demonstration have made it possible for end users to create automations by explicitly demonstrating their behavior to LLMs. However, these approaches rely on the assumption that users know what to automate and what is capable of being automated. Additionally, automation via LLM agents is often expensive compared with programs. We introduce Motif, a system that passively observes everyday browser activity to discover recurring interaction patterns that are programmable, makes recommendations to users whenever a pattern is discovered and generate a program to install after user confirmation. Users can review, and refine the program using natural language. We evaluated Motif in a multi-day study, comparing its ambient discoveries against automations users attempted to build via ``vibe coding.'' With eight participants, Motif discovered more automatable patterns than users recognized. Most of them matched participants' routines and were useful. Follow-up surveys showed most would continue using Motif-generated programs.
Kuangshi Ai, Patrick Phuoc Do, Chaoli Wangcs.HC cs.AI cs.GR
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/.
Mateus Levi Simões Fernandes, Alberto Sardinhacs.HC cs.AI cs.MA
Explainable AI (XAI) has shown promise for human-agent collaboration, yet results rely on hand-crafted policies in custom environments, limiting generalizability to state-of-the-art teaming research. We provide the first systematic evaluation of XAI support generated from an intrinsically explainable learned policy in an established benchmark. Using the Hierarchical Ad Hoc Agents (HA$^2$) architecture in Overcooked-AI, we generate real-time explanations from hierarchical subtask selections, delivered through text or audio via a novel trigger-based system. Our between-subjects experiment (n=38) found no significant performance effects, though participants with explanations showed trends toward faster performance improvement. More notably, audio explanations produced a significant reduction in participants' working-alliance bond with the agent -- an effect absent under the text modality -- suggesting that spoken explanations activate partnership expectations the underlying reactive policy cannot meet. We provide the first modality comparison in real-time human-agent collaboration and establish a baseline methodology for evaluating intrinsically explainable reinforcement learning architectures in benchmark environments. Results point to matching explanation modality to the underlying policy's capacity of sustaining the partnership its delivery implies as a potential path for more effective collaborative XAI.
A concert is a collective experience, but recorded performance videos are typically watched alone, stripping away the shared audience presence that makes concerts feel eventful. We investigate whether persona-based LLM audience agents can recreate aspects of this collective experience by generating real-time fan chat alongside a K-pop performance video. We present a multi-agent system in which ten LLM agents react through live-chat messages, comparing a persona-conditioned audience (each agent assigned a distinct fan identity, bias, and chat style) with a no-persona baseline. In a within-subjects pilot with K-pop fans (N=11), persona conditioning substantially improved model-level chat quality and perceived naturalness, but did not translate into differences in social connectedness, engagement, or affective response. Interviews suggest that online K-pop concert chat may operate as collective monologue rather than interpersonal dialogue, and that meaningful participation depends on shared identification with the specific artist and fandom. Persona conditioning can make LLM audiences appear more natural, but culturally meaningful collective experience may require deeper alignment between persona, crowd behavior, fandom identity, and user expectations.
AI assistants in human-AI collaboration often correct suboptimal human actions through behavioral feedback (e.g., alerts or steering-wheel nudges in assistive driving). Such interventions can mitigate immediate errors, but long-term improvement requires addressing the underlying misconceptions that cause repeated mistakes. We introduce SENSEI, a framework that infers user misconceptions from interaction behavior and provides targeted, minimal yet sufficient suggestions to correct them. Our approach departs from action- or trajectory-level interventions by operating over a structured knowledge representation to localize and correct the sources of erroneous behavior. Across three long-horizon tasks with diverse misconceptions and corresponding behaviors, SENSEI demonstrates zero-shot compositional generalization, disentangling multiple overlapping misconceptions despite training only on single-misconception cases. A user study further shows that our method identifies real human misconceptions and provides effective guidance that improves long-horizon task performance, successfully correcting $90\%$ of student misconceptions. Code and project page are available at https://misoshiruseijin.github.io/SENSEI/.
Eunsu Kim, Jessica R. Mindel, Kyungjin Kim +1cs.CL
As large language models (LLMs) increasingly shape how users form, refine, and extend their goals, attributing contributions in human-AI collaboration becomes critical for users calibrating their own reliance and for evaluators assessing AI-assisted work. Yet existing methods focus on final artifacts, missing the process through which goals themselves are jointly shaped. We introduce a goal-level attribution framework, CoTrace, that decomposes explicit goals into verifiable requirements and traces both direct contributions and indirect influences across dialogue turns. Applying CoTrace to 638 real-world collaboration logs, we find that while models account for only 11-26% of goal-shaping contribution, they contribute substantially more on introducing lower-level concrete requirements, and make various kinds of indirect contributions. Through controlled simulations, we show that interaction design choices significantly affect model goal-shaping behavior. In a user study, exposing participants to goal-level analyses shifts their perceived contributions by nearly 2 points on a 5-point scale, revealing systematic miscalibration in how users understand their own AI-assisted work.
LLMs are increasingly used for end-user task planning, yet their black-box nature limits users' ability to ensure reliability and control. While recent systems incorporate verification techniques, it remains unclear how users can effectively apply such rigid constraints to represent intent or adapt to real-world variability. For example, prior work finds that hard-only constraints are too rigid, and numeric flexibility weights confuse users. We investigate how interaction workflows can better support users in applying constraints to guide LLM-generated plans, examining whether abstracting strictness into high-level types (i.e., hard and soft) paired with distinct verification mechanisms helps users more reliably express and align intent. We present U-Define, a system that lets users define constraints in natural language and categorize them as either hard rules that must not be violated or soft preferences that allow flexibility. U-Define verifies these types through complementary methods: formal model checking for hard constraints and LLM-as-judge evaluation for soft ones. Through a technical evaluation and user studies with general and expert participants, we find that user-defined constraint types improve perceived usefulness, performance, and satisfaction while maintaining usability. These findings provide insights for designing flexible yet reliable constraint-based workflows.