Papers

Geometric proof is a foundational yet challenging topic in mathematics, requiring students to integrate visual, logical, and notational skills. While technology has enhanced learning in other mathematical domains, its impact on geometric proof remains limited. To investigate this gap, we interviewed 18 geometry teachers to establish the technical requirements of educational proof tools. These requirements inform our review of 33 commercial and research tools. Our findings reveal a critical mismatch: while teachers value certain digital tools for initial planning and exploration activities, they revert to pen-and-paper for formal proof because it supports diagram annotation and provides space for multiple approaches to proof-solving. Annotating the diagram is a key component of the proof-solving workflow that existing tools do not support. We propose four technical and human-centered design guidelines for educational proof tools to meet teacher needs at scale: integrating diagram and proof, generating problems and feedback automatically, supporting multiple proof formats, and reducing accidental complexity in the user experience.

Color discrimination is a fundamental aspect of visualization as it influences how people interpret visual encodings. Many visualization guidelines are informed by perceptual studies, yet relatively few have been replicated. Acknowledging that the interaction between human perception, visual tasks, and display technology can change over time, we replicate two crowdsourced color discrimination studies conducted 10 years earlier. Specifically, we replicated a visualization-focused color discrimination task (N=144) and a more general perceptual discrimination task (N=394). In both studies, our results reproduced the original perceptual effects. We further use the replication to investigate whether color-related practice influences color discrimination. Specifically, we extended our replication studies by adding questions about participants' engagement with color practices. We then examined whether diverse color-related practices (e.g., artistic hobbies, knowledge of color theory, and cosmetic makeup use) influenced color discrimination. We found no significant difference between participants who reported engaging in color-related practices and those who did not, suggesting that design guidance regarding color discrimination may generalize across viewers regardless of their regular color practice.

As generative AI (genAI) systems become embedded in education, employment, healthcare, and creative industries, the impact and engagement among marginalized groups have become both a widespread discourse and a focus in scholarly research. As a starting point, we examine public discourse and empirical research to explore the impact of genAI systems on Black communities. We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) of 91 empirical papers alongside a media discourse frame analysis of 28 public resources, applying Entman's framing theory to map how each corpus defines problems, attributes causes, and proposes treatments. Our SLR reveals that scholarly research concentrates heavily on technical bias detection, reducing Blackness to measurable variables rather than engaging with cultural practices, structural conditions, or Black knowledge systems. Our frame analysis reveals that public discourse attributes genAI-related harm to historical and systemic forces, while scholarly research stops its causal accounts at the dataset and its treatment recommendations at technical reform. We demonstrate that this misalignment is structurally produced: anti-Blackness operates simultaneously across both registers, generating a shared evacuation of Black epistemic agency. We argue for frame analysis as an AI ethics methodology capable of surfacing what technical evaluation forecloses.

Emotion preference learning uses pairwise comparisons between candidate descriptions to align multimodal large language models (MLLMs) with human judgments of open-ended emotion descriptions and to train reward models that capture human emotional preferences. However, conventional pairwise supervision is often sparse, typically providing only a single negative description for each positive description, and therefore offers limited coverage of the diverse ways in which an emotion description can be incorrect. In particular, models may be insufficiently exposed to semantically fluent but emotionally inconsistent descriptions. Beyond this data-level limitation, relying on a single MLLM judge introduces a distinct model-level concern: its judgments can be affected by model-specific biases when interpreting fine-grained or ambiguous multimodal emotional cues. To address these limitations, we propose Error-Augmented Preference Optimization (EAPO), a framework for improving the reliability of MLLM-based emotion preference judgment at both the data and model levels. First, we construct an error-augmented dataset by generating multiple controlled and emotion-aware negative descriptions from each preferred description. We then adapt multiple independent MLLM judges to this richer supervision and aggregate their preference margins using margin-calibrated soft fusion, which maps heterogeneous margins to a common scale before aggregation. Experiments on the MER2026-EmoPrefer Challenge dataset and our error-augmented dataset demonstrate that EAPO improves emotion preference prediction and enhances the robustness of MLLM judges when evaluating fluent descriptions that conflict with the video's multimodal emotional evidence. Our code is available at https://github.com/slash1028/EAPO-EmoPrefer.

As mobile phone adoption has surged, so have scams involving these devices. One such scam, known as SMiShing (or smishing) after Short Message Service (SMS), involves fraudsters sending phishing links via mobile texts. Despite the prevalence of SMiShing, there is a lack of data on who is most vulnerable to these attacks. Prior research on phishing (its email counterpart) suggests that susceptibility may vary by demographic and contextual factors. In two large-scale surveys, we use a previously published simulation method to collect data from representative samples of U.S. adult mobile phone users. Our findings indicate that younger individuals and college students are particularly vulnerable. Participants struggled to correctly identify legitimate messages, with the second study providing comparisons of financial message variants. Researchers, regulators, and telecoms can help users by creating mobile-specific interventions for under-24 and university customers and adding verifications and warnings.

Prehospital stroke assessment aims to accurately identify stroke symptoms and make rapid decisions through standardized procedures within an extremely narrow time window, thereby saving valuable time for subsequent treatment. In clinical practice, FAST-based scales are widely used for prehospital stroke assessment by issuing instructions that guide subjects to perform specific actions to screen facial, arm, and speech functions. However, in home and community settings, non-clinical users often encounter challenges such as inaccurate descriptions, incomplete symptom observation, and difficult operational procedures, which may lead to inaccurate or biased assessment results. To address these challenges, this paper presents StrokeGuard: a multi-agent guided system designed for prehospital stroke assessment that makes mobile FAST screening more standardized and executable. Specifically, to overcome the limitations of traditional single-agent systems in terms of procedural fault tolerance and user guidance capability, StrokeGuard adopts a dual-channel agent mechanism that separates formal assessment (i.e., facial palsy, arm weakness, speech impairment) from procedural support (e.g., step prompts, error correction, and real-time feedback). It guides the assessment process through multi-agent collaboration, dual-channel interaction, state-machine control, and stage-local fallback recovery mechanisms. Stage-specific scoring is delegated to constrained pretrained video assessment modules, while evidence source records are integrated with structured report generation. The user evaluation uses MATES-9, an exploratory scale for measuring user experience in multistep AI-guided tasks. In a simulated prehospital scenario, StrokeGuard improves the MATES-9 total score over a paper FAST-style form by 10.83 points, corresponding to a 23.8% relative increase.

Data visualizations are widely used for communicating information, but they are also vulnerable to intentional manipulations that induce misleading interpretations. Existing methods focus on locating tampered regions or recovering hidden information, without explaining how the visualization has been manipulated or why the resulting changes may mislead viewers. We propose VizAnchor, a framework for visualization manipulation understanding through dual-anchor evidence construction and VLM-based reasoning. In the first stage, VizAnchor constructs a semantic anchor to recover authentic chart information and a spatial anchor to localize tampered regions. In the second stage, three specialized agents decode the manipulation. The misleader grounding agent analyzes a four-panel visual prompt to predict the misleader information. The chart narrative reconstruction agent takes the original and tampered charts as inputs and reconstructs their respective visual narratives. Finally, the intent inferring agent integrates the visual evidence and misleader information to infer the misleading intent. We further construct a dataset for tampering localization and a dataset for misleading intent inferring. Evaluation shows that VizAnchor accurately localizes manipulations and produces faithful explanations of their manipulation, misleaders, and misleading intents.

This chapter examines AI-media objects - creative and artistic outputs generated through generative artificial intelligence in the form of text-to-X tools - in relation to three avant-garde movements of the twentieth century: Dadaism, Surrealism, and Conceptual Art. Drawing on Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking-Glass as an early precursor to these three movements and to anti-rationalist aesthetics, and on three case studies in AI-generated conceptual architecture - Matias del Campo's "Deep House" and Hassan Ragab's "Post-Pharaonic Architecture" and "A State of Decay" - the chapter develops the concept of latent-surrealism. Latent-surrealism includes a set of aesthetic and methodological conditions inherent to creative AI-media objects. These include the use of readymade datasets reassembled through collage-like processes, the absurd as an aesthetic quality of machine hallucinations, and the decoupling of craft from artistic value. The chapter further argues that AI-media objects represent a shift in the conditions of creative production: where earlier computational tools required graphical interfaces and programming literacy, natural language now functions as the operative medium. This repositions the prompt (as language-based instructions) in the center of the creative process, in continuity with the legacy of Conceptual Art, and signals a linguistic turn across creative fields that make (use of) AI-media objects.

The prediction of student engagement from the online tutoring videos is difficult because engagement is a multidimensional construct comprising distinct behavioral, emotional, and cognitive states. A reliable prediction requires bringing together different types of behavioral signals as well as expressive cues. Through our analysis of the CASED dataset, it is clear that engagement prediction gets even harder due to the high inter-person variability as well as the subjectivity of the engagement annotation. To tackle these challenges, we develop a multimodal framework that integrates the implicit spatiotemporal features extracted from pretrained video, audio, and image encoders along with structured behavioral modalities like head pose, gaze, facial action units, emotion, and wavelet-based audio features. We integrate these modalities via a Perceiver IO latent bottleneck. Moreover, student and instructor personalities are modeled as variational posteriors over learnable embeddings to enable partial pooling across participants. We employ evidential regression and spectral-normalized Gaussian process classification heads for uncertainty-aware prediction to further improve robustness and calibration. Benchmark on the CASED challenge test set shows that all participating methods converge near random-chance performance, revealing the difficulty of the dataset. In this highly ambiguous regime, our framework achieves competitive performance while uniquely offering well-calibrated uncertainty metrics, demonstrating that reliable risk-quantification is an essential prerequisite for deploying engagement models in real-world educational tools.

On social media, we often encounter short-form video ads that employ cinematic editing techniques to evoke an emotional response. While AI tools are beginning to generate such cinematic ads automatically, we lack a fine-grained framework for evaluating these ads. In this paper, we first characterize social media video ad formats and identify cinematic ads as a recurring format in our corpus. We then analyze the duration, shot structure, audio and text elements, and editing techniques of cinematic ads to inform a two-stage generation pipeline in which an LLM first generates a shot plan and a video generation model renders the video. Using this pipeline, we generated 70 cinematic ads for 35 real brands and recruited professional video editors to critique their editing choices. From their critiques, we derive six dimensions of editing quality: narrative progression, audiovisual coordination and sound design, visual composition and graphics, shot-to-shot continuity, message and brand coherence, and temporal rhythm and pacing. We discuss how these dimensions can guide editing-aware generation, human evaluation, and automated evaluation of AI-generated cinematic ads.

LLMs are becoming part of everyday life, including for older adults (OAs). OAs often learn digital technologies with younger family members, who have traditionally served as "warm experts" providing trusted and personalized operational help. LLMs expand this role: family supporters may also help OAs judge appropriate uses, consider what information to disclose, assess the credibility of outputs, and decide when AI-generated advice is safe to act on. We conducted a formative qualitative study with six OAs and seven younger adults (YAs), using semi-structured interviews and scenario-based think-aloud activities. OA participants described using LLMs to lighten their recurring reliance on family, while preserving family as a selectively invoked support channel. However, because LLMs rarely produced visible operational breakdowns, YAs had limited signals for when support was actually needed. Instead, YAs relied on OAs' partial disclosures and negotiated intervention through general warnings and self-imposed action boundaries. As a result, family support often solved an immediate problem without leaving reusable calibration knowledge for future use. Based on these findings, we propose design implications for intergenerational LLM support (e.g., consentful help requests, learning-oriented family support that preserves OA task ownership).

Effective human-AI interaction requires systems that dynamically adapt to a user's behavior and evolving understanding. When users interact with Large Language Models (LLMs), these models typically respond to prompts without sensing the user's immediate reactions. This lack of communicative synchrony can lead to information overload or leave confusion unresolved in real time. In this paper, we introduce Aura, a framework that enables LLM systems to dynamically modulate output based on a user's evolving emotions. Aura's Perception Module continuously estimates the user's emotional state from facial expressions. Our Policy Module then selects interventions through a probabilistic belief model. Finally, Aura's Generation Module uses parameter-efficient Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) adapters to produce contextually tailored responses mid-turn during response generation. We evaluated Aura in a within-subjects user study (N=20) on information-seeking tasks, where it achieved statistically significantly higher normalized perceived learning gains than a Llama-3 baseline and reduced interaction time by 21% relative to existing LLM baselines (GPT-4o, Llama-3). Our results indicate that real-time, context-sensitive interventions can improve learning efficiency and user satisfaction without observable degradation in factual accuracy. Aura thus supports the potential for more responsive and effective human-AI interaction.

Memory systems for conversational LLMs are conventionally evaluated by direct, fact-seeking questions about prior dialogue (Direct QA): can the model recall fact X from a prior conversation? We tested whether higher Direct QA accuracy correlates with higher user satisfaction in a 4-month deployment (40 users, 1,872 sessions, 7 memory conditions). Existing-benchmark Direct QA varies from 19.7% to 70.1% across the 7 conditions, but satisfaction does not change. We hypothesize that existing benchmarks and user satisfaction are tracking different capabilities: benchmarks measure elicited retrieval (recall when asked), while conversation requires natural integration (detecting relevance and naturally weaving prior context into a response). To examine this, we introduce MemUse, a set of real user-cued memory moments drawn from the deployment, scored by an integration-aware judgment of the natural conversational response. Holding the model and context fixed, the same system that scores 78.8% on Direct QA references only 7.9% of those facts in conversation – a 71-point gap. Within these moments, Natural Integration is associated with satisfaction, whereas Direct QA is not. We release the deployment corpus and MemUse together with all judgments and scoring prompts at https://github.com/ryuichi-sumida/memuse.

3D geometry editing is a critical yet labor-intensive part of the graphics pipeline, requiring artists to translate creative intent into precise operations in complex professional software. Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise for script-based 3D creation, but script generation is less suited to perception-driven editing of arbitrary existing meshes, where execution must remain visually grounded and untouched regions should be preserved. We present a visual-centric, training-free multi-agent system that edits existing 3D meshes directly in Blender by emulating the iterative workflow of human artists. Rather than generating scripts or regenerating geometry, our system operates through the Blender GUI: multimodal LLM agents observe the viewport, reason about the current mesh state, and execute localized edits through simulated user interactions. Experiments on a curated benchmark provide initial evidence that this agentic approach can follow natural language instructions, perform representative localized mesh edits, and preserve the overall identity of the input asset. Our results highlight a complementary regime for language-driven 3D editing: direct in-place modification of existing meshes within the native 3D editing workflow. We view this work as an exploratory step toward visual-centric agentic geometry editing in professional graphics software.

Location-aware generative systems can now select historical archives and real-time contextual information based on a user's surroundings to automatically generate narratives for urban heritage walks. Yet when multiple sources jointly inform generation, existing systems provide neither a clear representation of how much content from each source actually appears in the output nor an operational means of measuring it. We introduce the Historical Grounding Ratio (HGR), defined as the proportion of claim-bearing information units in a generated narrative that are supported by historical archives. HGR turns the realized share of historical evidence in a narrative into a directly measurable design parameter. In GeoDrama, a mobile narrative system, we created three conditions that used a common retrieval procedure and comparable evidence-bundle sizes while varying the allocation of information from different sources during generation. We evaluated how changes in HGR affected narrative experience through a within-subject walking study with 18 participants. Increasing HGR significantly strengthened the perceived relevance between narrative content and the specific location. However, historical understanding, integration with the visible scene, appropriateness of the amount of information, and intention to explore further did not increase monotonically with HGR; all four measures were highest in the intermediate, balanced condition. These findings show that designing location-aware generative interfaces involves not only retrieving relevant material but also determining how information from different sources composes the final output. HGR offers an operational measure for comparing information-allocation strategies and their experiential consequences.

Designed artifacts are ontological, shaping, and at times limiting, what becomes possible or imaginable. One path toward mitigating such foreclosures is giving people power over how systems are designed and built. Despite decades of scholarship around systems that enable such authorship, these systems are often evaluated on whether or not they are usable, useful, or technically feasible, leaving questions of ontological boundary negotiation, unexamined. We design two open-ended probes that utilize a Wizard of Oz technique to enable the experience of training a personalized machine learning system on phenomena people define themselves. In a week-long exploratory study, participants use one of two probes in the course of their everyday lives. We identify four sites where ontological boundaries were negotiated; the boundaries of a phenomena, the subject as part of relations, what is signal and what is noise, and the objectivity of data. We offer starting points for supporting boundary negotiation through design and discuss open-ended probes as a method for ontological design.

Human-robot teaching focuses on enabling nontechnical experts to customize robots according to their needs after deployment. With recent advances in machine learning, human-robot teaching is no longer confined to offline learning where the data gathering step from a human teacher is separated from when the robot learns. Instead, more recent approaches for human-robot teaching focus on coupling human teaching with robot learning. This coupling impacts the structure, timing, and content of the teaching and learning interaction. However, it is currently unclear how such coupling dynamics affect humanrobot teaching effectiveness and human perceptions towards the teaching process. Informed by human learning theories, in this paper we propose a new scale for classifying human-robot teaching interactions according to coupling dynamics present between the human teacher and robot learner. We apply this scale to a subset of the human-robot teaching literature to identify how coupling dynamics and human teacher mental model mismatches with the ground truth robot learning system affect teaching effectiveness and human perceptions towards the teaching process

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being embedded into all facets of society, from search to education, industrial, and financial applications. These systems' carbon and water footprints raise important sustainability concerns, particularly with adoption rates exceeding 80% among university students, despite limited insight into the environmental impacts of individual usage. Eco-feedback interfaces offer a promising approach to encourage more sustainable behaviors, yet their role in shaping LLM users' sustainability awareness and decision-making remains underexplored. We design and deploy the interface that visualizes latency-carbon trade-offs during live LLM interactions. We study its use with undergraduate computer science students (N=89, ages 18-24), enrolled in a computing ethics course, providing an empirical look at how a technically sophisticated and values-oriented user population responds to sustainability-aware AI interfaces. We found that the likelihood of choosing the eco-feedback system significantly decreased as perceived response latency increased (p < .001), while users' willingness increased when they recognized the carbon-saving impacts (p < .01). Also, students with stronger eco-mindedness demonstrated higher baseline willingness to adopt lower-carbon modes and reported increased awareness of the environmental impacts of LLM use, though this effect diminished as latency increased. These results position eco-feedback interfaces as a promising sustainability intervention and highlight their potential as an educational opportunity to promote more sustainable LLM use among university students and beyond.

AI systems increasingly make joint recommendations for users with conflicting preferences. However, when reasonable aggregation rules support different actions, a further question arises: who may choose how those preferences are combined? We study this interaction-level problem as aggregation-rule authority. Using synthetic preference profiles and profiles constructed from empirical ratings, we conduct a controlled behavioral audit of three LLMs under three authority conditions: unspecified, explicitly retained by users, and delegated to the model. In cases where two witness rules supported different actions, models almost never committed when users retained authority, but committed in every delegated case. All three models executed both witness rules perfectly when directly instructed. Yet when authority was unspecified or delegated, their aggregation-consistent outcome distributions differed across models and preference settings. Together, these results separate rule-execution capability from aggregation-rule authority: delegation assigns the model discretion to resolve the aggregation choice, but does not determine which collective outcome follows.

Effective color contrast in visual design is essential for content accessibility. While existing tools can identify contrast issues, they often operate in isolation from design workflows or are used as an afterthought. We present ColorA11Y, a system that supports designers in creating accessible content by providing just-in-time feedback and actionable recommendations throughout the authoring process to meet accessibility color contrast guidelines. Our system analyzes the visual properties of text and background elements and offers recommended changes, including text color adjustments, background modifications, and opacity changes. Through two user studies, we evaluate ColorA11Y's effectiveness. A user preference study (n=40) revealed varying effectiveness of different recommendations based on design context, while a qualitative study with designers (n=8) indicated a more seamless workflow experience in comparison to a baseline using a color contrast checker. This work advances a born-accessible approach to design, where accessibility considerations are seamlessly integrated into the creative process rather than treated as an afterthought.

On a 3D-printed tactile map, a building felt under the finger is an anonymous shape: touch alone cannot tell which footprint is which, and a spoken description cannot reliably point to one shape at one place. We present a web-based tool that lets a sighted helper click to add on-shape Braille labels to an already-generated map model, downstream of the geometry generator so that whoever knows the reader and the local Braille standard does the labeling. The tool offers click-based OpenStreetMap matching, hand-editable abbreviation that shrinks a name to fit a footprint, and print-safe dot geometry with a review step that catches anomalies before printing. We demonstrate it on five printed maps of different place types, from a downtown core to a college campus and a small dining mall. In formative sessions in which ten BLV readers compared an unlabeled print with an annotated one, four read Braille fluently, so we treat Braille as one output among several rather than the only one. The tool's core is the link between coordinates, geometry, and a place's semantics, which can drive an audio readout or a non-Braille code. The tool is available at https://leolee7.github.io/Annotate_Braille/.

LLMs are being used increasingly to measure aspects of student discourse (e.g. talk moves, collaboration, equity of voice) at scale. Typically, LLM-based measures of student talk use transcriptions of classroom conversations that only include verbal contributions, which de-contextualize student language. Common practices for validating these measures include comparing outputs against expert annotations by adults, using held out evaluation sets and F1 scores. We argue that these approaches are insufficient to ensure that such measures are meaningful and equitable for teaching and learning, particularly for racially and linguistically marginalized youth. In order to center the youth whose talk is being analyzed, re-contextualizing these classroom conversations and engaging youth in the research process is necessary. Sharing epistemic authority with youth, ultimately, centers their point of view and adds crucial nuance to the analysis of their talk that adult experts, researchers, and LLMs cannot provide. In a case study of multilingual youth in one 8th-grade math classroom, we address the epistemic exclusion of youth by employing multiple ethnographically-oriented methods to re-contextualize student conversations and center youth as epistemic authorities in conversation with researchers and LLMs. We conducted participant observations, interviews, focus groups, and member checks with four focal students. Findings reveal that there were misalignments between students' interpretations of their own math talk experiences and the LLM-based measures of their talk. Students contested both the LLM classifications and the coding scheme used to measure their talk, highlighting the need for youth to be involved in the epistemic process of producing knowledge about their experiences.

Transformed by digitization, everyday activities-paying bills, shopping, managing transportation-increasingly require older adults to navigate digital systems. To accomplish these digital activities of daily living (DADLs), older adults often rely on help that looks less like IT support-institutional, episodic, and product-oriented-and more like caregiving: relational, ongoing, and aimed at preserving their functional independence. We argue that this practice is technology caregiving and introduce a framework characterizing it along four dimensions: why support is needed, who provides it, when it occurs, and how it is delivered. Applying this framework, we then systematically review the literature on how older adults are supported in DADLs. From 3,381 unique records, 36 articles met the inclusion criteria. Findings show that technology caregiving involves burden, like traditional care, but is distinctly shaped as much by digital systems and their constant change as by technology caregivers' and older adults' abilities.

Inter-annotator disagreement in real-time affect annotation is widely treated as stochastic noise. We challenge this view by modelling ordinal annotation as an implicit game-theoretic coordination process against an internalised population prior under a post-hoc majority vote. We present the Ordinal Annotation Game, a conceptual scaffold in which the mapping from individual effort to collective consensus is governed by the semantic abstraction of the target construct. We evaluate it across two experiments sharing identical interface software and a uniform sensitivity threshold: a controlled sensory tracking study and an in-the-wild engagement study. Sensory annotation yields a consensus-dominant regime where active updates reinforce agreement, whereas engagement annotation inverts into an effort-limited regime where more labelling penalises consensus. The payoff slope reverses sign under identical processing, showing that ordinal disagreement is a structured behavioural phenomenon, not a discretisation artefact or random error.

AI agents pose significant risks as they are granted increasing autonomy. A commonly proposed solution is human oversight and keeping a ”human in the loop”, but this is not a simple solution: Not only do current approaches to AI agent design impede effective human oversight, but the cognitive capacities required for it are also themselves degraded by extended use of AI systems. This position paper argues that current approaches to the development and deployment of AI agent systems do not support effective human oversight – they contribute to its degradation. To address this, a top priority in the advancement of AI agents should be supporting the situated goals and cognitive requirements of effective human oversight, treating the human needs of overseers at the same level of importance as AI agent capability. To put this idea into practice, we connect work on automation and human-computer interaction to AI agent processes, outlining design-level affordances and organizational protocols that (1) support overseers in exercising critical judgement and (2) counteract the skill atrophy that arises from extended use of automation. We urge developers and deployers to adopt these or similar approaches. Without explicit support for the cognitive demands of effective human-agent interaction, AI agent systems will continue to passively incentivize the degradation of the very human skills they rely on.

In CLAUDE.md, "do not" is a natural-language instruction that the model interprets. Claude Code's deny is a built-in control that blocks an action before the agent can take it. Both can express the same security goal, but they control the agent in different ways. We measure this gap in 481 public CLAUDE.md files. An LLM matched the extracted candidate rules against Claude Code's documented controls, and two security practitioners independently checked a sample without seeing the model's answers or each other's labels. Depending on how closely a control had to match the written rule, only about 4-16% of the retrieved security rules had a matching built-in control. Under the strictest standard the estimate was 4.4% (95% CI: 2.6-6.7%), and the two annotators agreed closely on which rules had a match. A manual review of complete files found that our extraction method captured 66.3% of eligible security rules; the reported rates therefore apply to the rules it captured. This is a usable security problem: CLAUDE.md is a write-only channel. A developer writes a security rule but gets no feedback on whether a control will enforce it. The same plain-text form hides two kinds of rule: those a permission rule, mode, or sandbox can enforce, and those left to the model to interpret.

Increasing automation in rail transport shifts the train driver's role from active control to prolonged supervisory monitoring. This creates conditions for mental fatigue (MF) and reduced vigilance. Despite the safety relevance of this issue, evidence on the feasibility and robustness of physiological indicators of MF under operational rail conditions remains limited. Most prior work relies on simulators or lab studies. The present study investigated multiple subjective, physiological, and behavioral indicators of MF in professional train drivers across two complementary settings: a high-fidelity train simulator (n=14) and a real-world rail environment (n=6). To our knowledge, this is the first study to deploy a full multisensor battery under actual train operating conditions. In both settings, a standardized protocol was used comprising a baseline drive, a one-hour auditory n-back task as an MF induction procedure, and a second drive. Heart rate variability and breathing rate showed consistent and theoretically expected changes across both environments, suggesting reduced physiological arousal following the fatigue induction task. In contrast, EEG-based frontal theta power and parietal alpha and beta power, electrodermal activity, blink duration, and behavioral indicators did not show clear mental fatigue-related patterns. Real-world data collection revealed substantial technical challenges related to vibration, sensor connectivity, and concurrent high-frequency data acquisition. These findings suggest that autonomic indicators, particularly HRV and breathing rate, represent the most promising and ecologically robust measures for operational fatigue monitoring in train drivers. However, neurophysiological measures require further validation under realistic conditions before deployment in driver monitoring systems, and larger samples are needed to confirm these preliminary patterns.

Virtual Try-On (VTON) systems deployed on large public displays face a dual barrier: the physical strain of mid-air interaction and the social inhibition caused by public self-consciousness. This paper presents a real-time 3D avatar system integrating markerless motion capture with dynamic visual fidelity control to investigate and mitigate both barriers. Through a dual-study empirical evaluation, we first decoupled physical fatigue from gesture interaction ($N=20$), demonstrating that interaction fatigue is primarily driven by visuomotor latency rather than the physical act of gesturing; our optimized low-latency gesture pipeline achieved usability comparable to touchscreens while delivering superior immersion and hygiene. Building on these insights, our second study ($N=25$) investigated the "avatar fidelity paradox" via a $2 \times 2$ factorial design manipulating interaction modality (gestures vs. touch) and visual fidelity (photorealistic MetaHuman vs. stylized mannequin). Results reveal that while high fidelity and mid-air gestures independently maximize virtual embodiment ($p < .05$), their combination elicits the highest social awkwardness. Crucially, low-fidelity avatars serve as a "psychological mask" that alleviates public embarrassment during expressive gestures, while mid-air gestures simultaneously act as a compensatory mechanism to preserve perceived try-on trust despite reduced visual realism. Finally, we propose a context-aware fidelity framework to balance privacy, immersion, and commercial trust in public spatial interactions.

Algorithmic solver effort is often assumed to align with perceived puzzle difficulty, but this assumption is rarely tested against human solving data. We evaluate this assumption for Nonograms, a popular logic puzzle similar to Sudoku in which numeric clues along each row and column determine a unique solution grid. We formulate Nonograms as a constraint satisfaction problem and solve them using existing SAT solvers. We then conduct a user study in which we collect data on both participant interactions and reported difficulty. We find that neither participants' reported difficulty nor their behavioural signals correlate meaningfully with SAT solver metrics; however, we find evidence that expertise moderates the relationship between solver metrics and reported difficulty. In this process, we uncover distinct, recurring solving strategies that indicate human preference for complex propagation, diverging from solver-measured complexity.

As generative AI tools find increasing use in research workflows, ongoing debates on their impact, appropriateness and responsible use have led policymakers to enact policies to disclose AI use at multiple publishing venues. However, are current AI disclosure policies and practices reflective of their purpose? In this work, we first investigate disclosure policies of top computer science venues and find that despite their prevalence, they remain highly under-specified. Secondly, through a survey of computer science researchers (N=$109$), we characterize the necessity of disclosures across different research tasks and levels of human involvement. We learn that researchers find disclosures most necessary for tasks involving research design, and for tasks when the human involvement is low. We also compile expectations that researchers have about the information to be conveyed in AI disclosure statements. Lastly, through an analysis of $13867$ disclosure statements from EMNLP $2025$ and ICLR $2026$, we reveal a large disconnect between these expectations and AI disclosures in practice—a prime example being writing assistance which is deemed less necessary but is frequently disclosed. We conclude with recommendations to align AI disclosure policies and practices with expectations, suggesting a categorization of research tasks by perceived necessity and a boilerplate template capturing expected details.