Papers

Open Large Language Model (LLM) research increasingly produces compact and derived artifacts, such as adapters, quantized checkpoints, merged models, and distilled variants, that are distributed across papers, model hubs, model cards, code repositories, and release statements. Although these artifacts are publicly visible, digital libraries often lack sufficient evidence to identify, preserve, and cite them as coherent scholarly objects. We introduce a framework that conceptualizes curatability as a record-level property of distributed scholarly records and operationalizes it through four evidence dimensions: artifact identity, scholarly linkage, upstream evidence, and release assets. Guided by this framework, we conduct the first collection-scale characterization of open LLM curatability using a May 2026 snapshot of 191,375 public Hugging Face repositories and a core corpus of 2,214 scholarly papers. Our results reveal a pronounced visibility-to-curatability funnel. While 90.7% of paper records contain at least one useful curation signal, only 18.1% combine usable upstream evidence with concrete release evidence, and only 6.1% provide sufficiently coordinated evidence to support high-curatability records. Based on these findings, we derive a minimal seven-field curatable record and complementary responsibilities for model hubs, scholarly indexes, and digital libraries, providing practical guidance for improving the preservation and bibliographic control of open LLM artifacts.

Journaling is a common practice for emotional expression, reflection, and processing. However, as entries accumulate, it can become difficult to interpret and compare their affective content, especially since traditional text-based analyses and visualizations often struggle to convey affective nuance. We introduce Data Characters, a visualization approach that represents affective content in journaling through human-like characters. Using a customizable Data Character as a design probe, we investigate the potential of character-based representations for conveying affective experiences and explore what visual encodings emerge through customization. Preliminary walkthroughs with two participants demonstrate the intuitiveness and feasibility of the approach. This work contributes an exploratory approach to studying how affective experiences can be visually represented and encoded through anthropomorphic forms.

With the increasing importance of teamwork skills for modern workplaces, development of teamwork training programs has received substantial attention. Game-based teamwork training is one promising approach that is engaging, cost-effective, and well-suited to increasingly decentralized workplaces. However, design of effective game-based teamwork training requires understanding how a game elicits specific desired teamwork behaviors. Significant progress has been made in characterizing these relationships. However, despite its critical importance, little work has examined how a game's design influences team adaptability behaviors. This paper presents a preliminary framework for analyzing adaptability in cooperative games by conceptualizing adaptive stimuli as retrieval or disruption of players' ludic knowledge. We illustrate this framework through a qualitative case study that applies interaction analysis methods to gameplay videos of a Overcooked!, a cooperative cooking game. We examined instances where game events led to players altering their behavior and connected the game's design features that resulted in each event with three adaptive stimulus cue categories. Although exploratory and limited to a small case study of a single game, the proposed framework is grounded in established theories across teamwork research and game studies, and it offers an initial vocabulary for describing how cooperative games can be designed to create demands for team adaptation. With this continued development, the framework may provide an analytic tool to help inform the design and evaluation of purpose-built game-based teamwork training environments.

The integration of AI into qualitative design research presents a fundamental tension: how do we leverage AI while preserving the subjective, intuitive judgments that define design expertise? This paper examines this question through a case study of analyzing 20 user responses about video conferencing platforms for educational contexts. We argue that AI sensemaking tools risk flattening the rich data patterns, amplifying contradictory textures of user feedback into sterile categories thereby transforming design research from an interpretive craft into a mechanical sorting exercise (rigid and formal). Through comparative analysis of AI-assisted sensemaking versus human-centered approaches to the same dataset, we identify when algorithmic efficiency enhances understanding and when it diminishes the designer's interpretive agency (uncovering hidden needs, critical enquiry, what if enquiries, making decisions, having trade-offs). We present a framework for augmented sensemaking that positions AI as an instrument for amplifying human judgment rather than replacing it. Our findings suggest that the most valuable role for AI in design research is not to eliminate subjectivity, but to make it more intentional, reflective, and accountable.

Integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly generative AI, into medical training has prompted concerns about learner over-reliance, misuse, and erosion of foundational clinical competencies. We propose a conceptual reframing at the decision level: the problem is not misuse but misclassification - a mechanistic failure of real-time metacognitive evaluation in selecting a subzone-inappropriate AI interaction mode. Drawing on "SCAN" (Substitute, Complement, Aid, Non-Negotiable), a human-centric decision-making framework for generative AI task allocation grounded in Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development and metacognition, we advance the emerging social-constructivist conversation around AI in medical education by offering a testable account of AI's role in clinical reasoning development. This framework yields testable predictions for how misclassification can be detected, mitigated, and, more importantly, prevented in the clinical learning environment. Regarding clinical reasoning development, we show how trajectories of skill acquisition (upskilling) and failure (the triad of skill failure: de-skilling, never-skilling, and mis-skilling) operate at the individual task level in ways that fixed-phase, cohort-wide treatments fail to capture. We further identify passive engagement within correctly classified AI-scaffolded tasks as a particularly insidious, detection-resistant pathway to mis-skilling - one requiring subzone re-identification from AI assistance to expert assistance, with human experts serving as epistemic auditors. The paper operationalizes SCAN for clinical curriculum design, supervision, and assessment, and opens an empirical research agenda grounded in cognitive science. This paradigm shift from misuse to misclassification is not semantic: it offers educators a clear perspective on what to look for, what to assess, and what to intervene on.

Polis is a popular democratic innovation tool that allows asynchronous citizen engagement through atomic statements: short statements that together describe a complex question, inviting the citizen to vote Agree or Disagree on each. This paper uses 119 conversations with 100 or more participants and an extensive data export, drawn from a wider set of 271 collected processes. The paper asks what determines the output of such a process. Three parties shape the result. The developer of the platform has made important design choices that restrict the outcome: the number of groups the platform is able to report (restricted to 2–5) and which statements are prioritized. The convener defines the assignment: the initial statements that set the tone, the policy that accepts or rejects new statements and who can be invited. Finally, the participant works within these boundaries. With access to less than half of the generated statements, they end up responding to more statements when their conversation seems to have an achievable number of statements to complete, than when they are presented with more statements. Due to choices such as warm path clustering, the exported resulting clustering cannot be reproduced based on the voting data. Conveners may want to re-analyse their own conversations once the process is closed, to consider the data in its entirety, and make their own analysis priorities explicit.

Generative AI systems are increasingly used to answer personal questions and mediate everyday practices, including religion. However, existing discussions around AI alignment and ethics have largely centered secular, Western, and Abrahamic assumptions about religion, offering limited attention to other faith-based traditions. In this paper, we examine how Hindu users engage with generative AI systems in relation to their religious knowledge, belief, and practice. Drawing on 15 semi-structured interviews with Bangladeshi Hindu participants, we analyze how users interpret AI-generated religious representations, scriptural explanations, devotional interactions, and synthetic religious media. We found that AI can be both accessible and ethically troubling. While AI supported scriptural inquiry, devotional visualization, and religious storytelling, our study also identified concerns about theological flattening, cultural misrepresentation, devotional manipulation, and the simulation of sacred presence and authority. We conclude by arguing that religious alignment in generative AI requires interpretive alignment: systems that disclose their limits, preserve plurality, and avoid simulating sacred authority and sycophantic personalization.

AI agents are evolving into long-running computational entities that can invoke tools, maintain memory, and complete complex tasks across applications. In real-world settings, completing a task often requires humans and AI to take turns leading its execution. Such alternation depends on the seamless handoff of the work state of the task between humans and AI. Existing agent systems, however, provide humans and AI with separate work environments. AI agents must therefore rely on additional bridges to continue work: either developers build task-specific interfaces to access the work state, or users manually transfer relevant parts of it through screenshots or textual descriptions. Both approaches make handoffs costly and scale poorly. We propose Human-AI Co-inhabitation, a type of work environment that enables humans and AI to seamlessly take turns continuing work on the same task, and design and implement CrabOS to realize this concept. CrabOS represents the work state as natural-language-readable text objects shared by humans and AI, allowing both to access and manipulate it directly through the same auditable interface without bridges. Case studies show that CrabOS elevates support for complex tasks with alternating human and AI leadership from bridge-dependent application-level solutions to native operating-system capabilities, which provide a new foundation for developing and running AI agents.

FPGA-GPP heterogeneous systems combine software flexibility with the performance and energy efficiency of reconfigurable hardware. However, determining which application tasks should execute on the GPP or FPGA requires extensive expertise and design-space exploration, particularly when user objectives vary across latency, communication, resource utilisation, and power. This paper proposes Gen-TAS, a knowledge-grounded LLM framework for user-specific FPGA-GPP task allocation. By combining task-graph analysis with RAG, Gen-TAS grounds LLM reasoning in historical implementation knowledge and generates multiple explainable strategies tailored to the specified objectives. Human-in-the-loop selection and a deterministic backend connect LLM-generated decisions to reproducible FPGA SoC implementations. Experiments on CNN and SDR workloads across multiple LLMs demonstrate stable, requirement-driven allocation. Under latency-oriented objectives, implementations following the selected strategies achieve speedups of up to 2.45$\times$ and 92.53$\times$, respectively, relative to the corresponding all-GPP baselines while other objectives select strategies that trade some acceleration performance for FPGA-GPP communication, resource utilisation, or FPGA power.

Anchoring - the choice of frame of reference for mixed reality (MR) interface elements - is a critical design decision involving trade-offs between accessibility, interaction comfort, and visual interference. Despite its importance, user preferences for anchoring across different mobility contexts and interface properties remain poorly understood, as prior work has largely focused on specific tasks or fixed interface configurations. We address this through a mixed-methods user study in which participants configure anchoring strategies across different mobility conditions and interface types. Combining behavioral analysis with structured qualitative inquiry, we analyze how participants select and reason about anchoring modes. Our results show a clear transition from world-anchored interfaces in stationary contexts to body-anchored interfaces during locomotion. However, no single body anchor consistently dominates, highlighting the personal nature of anchoring strategies. Our qualitative analysis reveals the factors users consider in their anchoring decision, including interface accessibility, stability during interaction, visual clutter, and individual mental models. These findings inform the design of adaptive and controllable MR interfaces and highlight the importance of supporting user customization.

Learning to Defer (LtD) extends supervised learning by allowing a Machine Learning (ML) model to defer harder or less confident decisions to a human expert. Despite being geared for human-AI collaboration, LtD strategies neglect the potential negative interference of human cognitive biases. Our contribution is twofold. First, we demonstrate that standard LtD strategies show class-dependent sampling bias in classification tasks in practice, and thus may disproportionately defer the minority classes when applied to imbalanced datasets. Second, we show that such asymmetries in task delegation may trigger human biases, ultimately leading to poorer downstream decision making. Specifically, we conduct a user study ($N=226$) where participants complete a classification task on a set of deferred items, with conditions presenting different levels of class imbalance. Our results show that participants exposed to a highly imbalanced rejection set achieved lower classification accuracy in the majority class compared to those exposed to a more balanced set, regardless of which class constituted the majority. Exploratory analyses suggest that this may be an instance of the Test-taker's effect, which stems from a mismatch between the actual distribution of classes and the participants' expectations about that distribution. Finally, we discuss the implications of these findings for the deployment of LtD algorithms.

Creative professionals rarely design for themselves–they design for audiences whose preferences they must anticipate. Yet current text-to-image exploration tools derive diversity entirely from the designer's own input–their prompts, their chosen dimensions, their search queries–confining exploration to what the designer already knows to look for. We present FocusGen, an interactive system that introduces external perspectives into visual design exploration through a "virtual focus group" of simulated persona agents. In contrast to prior persona systems in which multiple agents converge as critics on a single evolving artifact, FocusGen uses personas as parallel generators: each agent–constructed from demographic data, a procedurally generated backstory, and aesthetic preferences elicited through interviews–independently drives an iterative generation loop that produces its own visual concept, transforming one design brief into a spectrum of audience-conditioned directions. With real human participants, we confirm that the iterative refinement loop produces outputs people prefer over zero-shot generation. With synthetic agents at scale, we show that persona conditioning yields higher visual diversity than a generic-assistant baseline–measured by CLIP distance and corroborated by human perceptual judgments–and that open-ended preference interviews yield more diverse outputs than structured ones for both human and synthetic cohorts, while also revealing that agent cohorts recover only part of the diversity of comparable human cohorts. A qualitative study with 16 creative professionals suggests FocusGen helps designers discover unanticipated directions, overcome fixation, and probe audience contexts–while surfacing stereotyping risks that we analyze. We position FocusGen as a divergence scaffold for early-stage ideation rather than a substitute for audience research.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly equipped with augmented reasoning capabilities to generate rationales that support human decision-making. Yet these text-dense rationales often impose substantial cognitive burdens. Building on a formative co-design study that identified user preferences for non-linear reasoning representations, we developed Graphionale as a testbed for empirically studying argument-map-style rationale visualization. This system transforms linear LLM rationales into interactive, multi-level graphs. It explicitly structures logical relationships (e.g., conclusions, premises, support, and objections), while further extracting entities and relations within each statement to construct condensed node-link representations. We conduct a large-scale online user study (N = 204) to examine when graphical rationales are more effective than textual ones, across varying task modality (verbal vs. visual reasoning), rationale format (textual vs. graphical), and question difficulty (easy vs. hard). Our results show that graphical rationales do not help uniformly: they improve trust calibration for verbal reasoning yet feel more cognitively demanding and less satisfying; for visual reasoning, they impair calibration yet feel more engaging and helpful. In each modality, the format that better supports calibrated decisions is not the one users prefer, highlighting that matching rationale format to task modality is key to effective AI explanation design. Our findings contribute empirical design knowledge about when and how graphical rationales support human decision making, and inform the next-generation reasoning-aware AI interfaces.

A common expectation in visualization research is that outcomes recommend how researchers and practitioners take action or make design decisions. We often express these as "guidelines." Yet, the term "guideline" is both ambiguous and loosely defined, and what one researcher considers a guideline may be too broad, too loose, or too strict for another. We take a closer look at a broader set of terms that can express desirable results around visualization research, and untangle how these words are understood in the community in relation to other similar terms. We base our work on an exploratory study with experts, followed by a crowdsourcing study with a separate mapping phase (n=30) and rating phase (n=42) targeting input from the broader visualization community, and an analysis of the use of terminology in 3,877 IEEE VIS papers published from 1990 to 2024. Based on our findings, we call for more nuanced, precise discussions of research outcomes and their communication to the broader community, including practitioners and students.

AI tools that support collaborative discussion typically treat the discussion as a standalone task, focusing only on its content and setting aside the social context of the group having it. But it is groups with a shared history, with their own norms, hierarchies, and relationships, where the most tangled and complex discussions tend to arise. These discussions cannot be understood apart from that context, and AI that overlooks it risks failing to convey what a discussion means, or even misrepresenting it. Drawing on two studies of how experienced Wikipedia editors read and make sense of discussions, we propose an AI-Assisted Sensemaking Model for Collaborative Discussions, which captures not only a discussion's arguments but also the norms and participants behind it, along with the context that gives each meaning. In this model, the system supports the early stages of the sensemaking process, and the degree to which it performs interpretive work can range from low to high. We argue that higher interpretive work reduces the burden on users but increases their reliance on the system's judgment. We then discuss the risks of an insufficiently intelligible system, what it would take to make one more intelligible, and the safeguards it still requires.

Population aging is increasing the need to monitor older adults safely and independently at home. However, cameras, wearables, and manual checks often introduce privacy, adherence, and attention burdens that hinder sustained health monitoring. This paper presents SuperSenseDoctor, a multimodal contactless agent architecture for long-term home health tracking. The system transforms WiFi, mmWave radar, and surface temperature into a persistent human health state. The system relies on fixed decision rules to conduct continuous daily monitoring and respond to pre-defined hazards. When abnormal signals appear, event-driven reasoning analyzes only standardized evidence to produce traceable care-support measures. In this manner, SuperSenseDoctor integrates sensing, temporal state, reasoning, and action into a unified and auditable loop. The calibrated multimodal pipeline achieves 1.994 bpm mean absolute error (MAE) and 3.142 bpm root mean square deviation (RMSD) for heart rate, 0.197 bpm MAE and 0.263 bpm RMSD for respiratory rate, and 96.5% fall-recognition accuracy. The evaluation also covers 2686 one-second states across 9 chronological intervals and reaches a 96.7% criterion-level Agent checklist pass rate. These results demonstrate the feasibility of a stateful contactless sensing-to-action architecture for long-term home health monitoring.

Background: Deceptive patterns are interface design strategies aimed at misleading users or favoring specific interests, compromising user experiences and ethical privacy principles. These patterns involve exploit different issues of the interaction between humans and technology, revealing gaps in the scientific literature regarding their understanding and working mechanisms. Purpose: This research characterizes deceptive patterns as a sociotechnical phenomenon, integrating human and technical dimensions while offering a self-explainable interactive catalog to raise awareness among users and designers. Methods: To characterize deceptive patterns as a sociotechnical phenomenon, a systematic literature review in Computer Science was conducted, and the Semiotic Framework was applied to analyze and organize the sociotechnical aspects of identified patterns in an integrated manner. An exploratory evaluation of the interactive catalog was conducted, combining heuristic evaluation and focus group. Results: The research identified multiple deceptive patterns in scientific literature. Analysis revealed that existing studies frequently addressed specific aspects of patterns, such as typologies or effects, and do not focus on sociotechnical issues. The exploratory evaluation suggested that the self-explainable catalog is useful and easy to use, with potential to inform users and promote awareness regarding the deceptive patterns existence and functioning. Conclusion: The study contributes to an informed understanding of deceptive patterns, highlighting the need for an approach that integrates human and technical dimensions. The self-explainable catalog is a promising tool to inform and promote awareness about the topic. By exposing the risks and mechanisms of these patterns, the research seeks to promote awareness among users and designers towards ethical interface design practices.

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) broaden access to authentic scientific inquiry through responsive instructor support as research problems become increasingly complex. Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) may extend this support by providing individualized assistance that can adapt as student needs change. However, how embedding GenAI within a CURE to provide support across the research process impacts student inquiry, collaboration, and scientific reasoning remains unresolved. Here we use longitudinal qualitative data collected across three semesters of a bioinformatics and genomics CURE to show that GenAI expanded the intellectual reach of the research experience in three distinct ways. First, personalized, on-demand scaffolding allowed students to move beyond the boundaries of instructor expertise and transform their own interests into researchable inquiry, with all teams developing distinct self-directed projects rather than selecting instructor-provided topics. Second, GenAI became part of the distributed cognitive system of research teams, helping novice researchers communicate and coordinate across differentiated expertise without eliminating specialization. Third, expanded capability did not replace the need for disciplinary judgment. Students increasingly validated, revised, or rejected AI-generated contributions, such that research independence emerged through retained intellectual responsibility. Together, these findings suggest that GenAI can extend the reach of CUREs by expanding what novice researchers can investigate, how they can collaborate, and the level of responsibility they can assume while preserving human judgment central to authentic scientific inquiry.

AI agents are poised to become a primary interface to digital products, acting across email, files, payments, and personal data. People without professional software backgrounds need understandable, reusable ways to control actions across services. We examine a mechanism in which a language model maps actions to plain-language consequence categories with user-authored "allow", "ask", or "never" rules. We ask what is gained and lost when decisions are made in advance as reusable rules rather than separately for each action. We analyzed 113 participants without professional software backgrounds across three conditions: per-action human-in-the-loop approval (HITL), automated per-action model review (AUTO), or user-authored consequence policy (POLICY). Participants judged 2 examples in each of 4 consequence categories; POLICY participants then set one rule per category. All supervised an 18-action simulated day, including 7 overreach actions. POLICY blocked less overreach than HITL (-20.1 percentage points, 95% CI [-32.1, -8.1]) and AUTO (-14.5 points, 95% CI [-25.8, -3.2]). POLICY lowered runtime prompts from 18.0 to 10.9, but total intervention time was not reliably lower when rule setup was included. Exploratory analysis showed that participants chose "ask" for 114 of 140 POLICY rules, returning most overreach actions to runtime. Of the 148 overreach actions executed in POLICY, 133 followed human approval and 15 ran automatically under "allow" rules. Across all 7 overreach actions, POLICY had the highest approval rate. Counterintuitively, user-authored rules did not by themselves provide stronger protection: many actions outside users' original requests went through after users approved them. These results reveal a gap between preference and commitment: repeatedly choosing "ask" preserves case-by-case choice but prevents a standing policy from settling decisions in advance.

People with disabilities (PWD) are increasingly engaging in social virtual reality (VR) platforms, where immersive and embodied interactions can intensify negative experiences. While prior work has examined harassment in VR, little is known about the harms experienced by PWD and the perceived severity associated with different harassment and disability types. Unlike harassment, which represents behaviors, harm is more critical to designing effective protections, as it reflects the consequences and impact; the realism of VR and the vulnerability resulting from disability identity can further amplify such impact. To characterize and model harms for PWD, we conducted a literature review, followed by an online survey with 67 PWD to understand participants' harassment experiences and resulting harms in social VR. We identified 19 types of harm in 5 categories, and reported the severity perception of each type of harm. Finally, we analyzed our results from the critical disability theory perspective, summarized the uniqueness of harm in social VR, and discussed design implications for specialized safety mechanisms that mitigate harm for PWD.

In this study, we examined whether current 3D reconstruction methods can support the creation of realistic holographic representations of laboratory objects for educational use. In this regard, we compared four approaches: photogrammetry, a neural radiance field (NeRF)-based method, Gaussian splatting, and LiDAR. These methods were used to generate holographic models of common laboratory items and their fidelity was evaluated by graduate students. Participants assessed the models for shape, color, texture, and visual defects using a repeated-measures design. Across objects, the NeRF-based method produced the most consistently high-fidelity representations, particularly for transparent, reflective, or low-texture items that were difficult to capture with other approaches. Shape and color were generally reproduced more successfully than texture, suggesting that some visual properties remain more challenging to represent accurately in educational holograms. Beyond identifying the strengths and limitations of each reconstruction method, the study demonstrates a practical workflow for creating immersive learning objects that may support pre-laboratory preparation, spatial reasoning, and student engagement in AR/MR-based educational environments. These findings offer design-relevant insights for educators and researchers developing immersive digital learning experiences.

Although Large language models (LLMs) mediate access to knowledge and computational assistance, their capabilities should benefit vulnerable groups in the same way. However, it is unclear whether existing AI systems are inclusive enough for blind and deafblind users to access the same functionality through Braille, whose indicators, contractions, and digital representations introduce distinct requirements for model comprehension. To this end, we introduce BrailleBench, a benchmark for evaluating LLMs in Braille comprehension from different Criteria. BrailleBench aligns 5,570 instances from five datasets, including mathematics, commonsense, and multi-hop question answering across English and Braille Grades 1 and 2. Different configurations are designed to understand whether the systems can comprehend Braille-authored content, express answers in Braille, and complete end-to-end Braille interaction. To ensure the quality and prevent evaluation bias, the benchmark is built through a deterministic, expert-reviewed pipeline via a self-created Braille Toolkit without using any data instances generated by LLMs. We evaluate six representative LLMs from various aspects. The results reveal a persistent gap between print-English capability and Braille accessibility. Braille understanding and expression are asymmetric, where Grade 2 is especially fragile on the input side compared to Grade 1, and fully Braille requests further reduce performance. The experimental observations provide valuable guidance for the development of future Braille AI systems. All related resources in BrailleBench are publicly available for future research.

Rural Bangladeshi outpatient clinics keep no patient records, prescriptions are handwritten, and physicians have under a minute per patient, so they easily miss a known adverse drug reaction (ADR) or drug-drug interaction (DDI). We built and evaluated an offline Android application that photographs a handwritten prescription, detects and reads each medicine line, resolves brand names to active ingredients, and retrieves, but never predicts, documented interactions and the patient's recorded reactions. This quantitative technical-feasibility study, with qualitative error analysis, involved no patients or clinicians. Reference data combine two Bangladeshi drug registries (27,880 brands) with 190,421 DDI pairs. A YOLOv8n line detector reached mAP@0.5 = 0.687 on held-out prescriptions but recalled only 60.6% of lines at the deployed cutoff. On-device ML Kit read 11.8% of 780 benchmark handwritten words exactly. We trained a CRNN-CTC reader on public handwriting data, decoded it against the brand lexicon, and fine-tuned it on 660 author-labelled prescription crops. On benchmark words, the reader accepted the correct ingredient for 41.5% and a wrong one for 4.2%, versus 21.0% and 5.3% for ML Kit at its preset cutoff (McNemar p<10^-20). On scorable lines from held-out real prescriptions, the reader accepted the correct ingredient for 36.0% [26.8, 46.3] and a wrong one for 2.2% [0.6, 7.8]. In 62 simulated runs on a mid-range phone, median time per patient was 26-31 s and 59 of 62 runs finished within 60 s, but 62% of medicine lines still needed a manual check. A cross-visit medication history added after the evaluation passed seven automated tests and one two-visit functional test but was not evaluated. The pipeline is feasible within the clinic workflow; reading handwriting, not retrieval, is the bottleneck. Nothing here demonstrates a clinical benefit.

This paper explores design considerations for egocentric network layouts in immersive environments, providing fresh empirical insights that enhance egocentric network analysis. An egocentric network focuses on the topological and semantic relationships around a focal node (ego) and its neighboring nodes (alters), targeting local sub-networks rather than the whole network. Traditional desktop environments, limited by display constraints, often face visual clutter as node numbers grow. Building on recent findings that immersive environments enhance network analysis, we explore layouts tailored for these spaces. We begin by identifying essential design properties and dimensions for egocentric network layouts, taking into account the unique features of immersive environments. Based on these, we design four layouts-Cube, Cylindrical, Radial, and Spherical-that vary across design dimensions. We evaluate these layouts in a user study with 24 participants completing egocentric analysis tasks. Our study suggests that Cube performed well for tasks focused on ego-alter connection strength. In contrast, Spherical was more effective for understanding alter topology, minimizing occlusion, and efficiently utilizing 3D space. These findings inform design implications for future immersive egocentric network layouts.

Silent speech recognition (SSR) provides an alternative communication pathway in the absence of audible speech. However, conventional approaches are limited by the need for constant facial attachment, privacy concerns, and unstable signal acquisition. Here, we propose a soft, active electromyography (EMG) interface that enables word-level SSR using machine learning. Worn on the hand, the device uses a fingertip electrode that can be positioned near the lips to acquire EMG signals only when needed. The interface integrates liquid metal (LM) interconnects, transparent flexible printed circuit (FPC) electrodes, and elastomer encapsulation to ensure high mechanical stability during finger motion. A deep neural network trained on these stable signals achieved a mean accuracy of 97.2 $\pm$ 1.3% across three subjects in classifying a 30-word vocabulary, demonstrating robust linguistic discrimination. Furthermore, real-time drone control validates the practicality of this approach in noisy and privacy-sensitive environments where conventional voice recognition fails. This study highlights the potential of soft, wearable EMG systems as secure and intuitive human-machine interfaces.

Generative text-to-image (T2I) systems are increasingly adopted in creative practice, yet their normative behaviors remain underexplored from the perspective of creative practitioners. In this workshop paper, we present a within-subject study with 14 creative practitioners using Stable Diffusion to create illustration from two tasks of differing specificity. We investigate whether and how practitioners perceive normative behavior in a T2I system and how it impacts their creative process depending on task specificity. Our findings show that participants perceived normative behavior through invariant patterns, stereotypical output, and unsolicited omission or addition of details. These experiences led to feelings of disempowerment and creative compromise. We discuss implications for XAIxArts, including prompt transparency and artist empowerment in creative contexts.

Background. Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for screening in evidence synthesis, where false negatives can remove relevant studies before full-text assessment. We compared human and LLM title-and-abstract screening workflows in a preregistered study embedded in a conceptually complex scoping review. Methods. After a conservative title-only screen, 1,131 records were screened by one review lead, four trained assistants screening non-overlapping subsets, and seven complete LLM runs using different models and processing configurations, including a nominally identical repeat run. We compared retained workload, operational recall against 316 verified eligible records, agreement, run-to-run consistency, and procedural burden. Because eligibility was verified only for records advanced and assessed in the parent review, recall estimates were operational. Results. No workflow recovered all verified eligible records. The human workflows and two GPT-5.4 file-batch runs retained 42.2-45.0% of records while achieving 82.3-82.9% recall. Gemini 3.1 file batches achieved the highest recall (83.9%) but retained 56.7% of records. All-at-once configurations recovered fewer eligible records than corresponding file-batch configurations. Two nominally identical GPT-5.4 file-batch runs agreed on 91.7% of records but differed on 94 records, including 29 verified eligible records retained by only one run. Discussion. LLM screening performance depended on the implemented workflow, not model identity alone. Processing configuration, workload, record-level variation, and human-LLM decision integration are therefore substantive properties of deployed systems. For high-recall tasks, LLMs are better suited to validated, auditable, human-supervised workflows than autonomous exclusion.

Hierarchical color maps can support users in the analysis of hierarchical data. For large hierarchies, dynamic color maps can improve discriminability upon user interactions, but the incremental color changes may cause users to lose their orientation in the data set. To address this challenge, we present Dynamic Tree Colors, a dynamic hierarchical color map that can be configured to a suitable tradeoff between discriminability and color stability. We also define quality metrics for both criteria and investigate our algorithm's performance with respect to these metrics as well as a user study with 18 participants. Our results indicate that Dynamic Tree Colors yields good results in a wide range of application scenarios, but it does not achieve the performance of the state-of-the-art algorithm Cuttlefish in the specific scenario that algorithm was designed for.

Errors are inevitable in procedural tasks, yet most AR guidance systems focus on step-by-step instruction delivery rather than helping users recognize and recover from mistakes. We present RegulAR, an AR task assistant for procedural error recognition and recovery. RegulAR models task instructions as a hierarchical dependency graph and combines this structure with a Multimodal Large Language Model (MLLM) to interpret egocentric observations during execution. This enables RegulAR to track progress, identify deviations by error type, estimate their impact on later steps, and deliver appropriately salient interventions through an in-situ head-up display that visualizes task state and recovery guidance. By making procedural structure explicit, RegulAR supports not only next-step guidance, but also reasoning about what went wrong, why it matters, and how users can get back on track. In a within-subject study (N=12), participants reported better task-structure understanding and recovery support with RegulAR than the MLLM-only baseline.

Processing/p5 libraries across different programming languages enact consistent priorities for creative coding as a designed experience. While different programming language ecosystems, like Java and JavaScript, are each associated with their own affordances, community norms, and patterns of use, Processing/p5 sketches across these languages share similarities. Based on case studies of building an implementation of Processing/p5 in two host languages, JavaScript and Lua, we propose a list of software decision-making guiding aspects that constitute Processing/p5, regardless of host language. We discuss this framework in the context of decisions in other exploratory and creative tools that demonstrate how each of the guiding aspects can be operationalized differently than in the case studies. The proposed list highlights opportunities for learning, research, and artistic practice through creation of new Processing/p5 libraries for creative coding and algorithmic art.