❌

Normal view

Received β€” 8 April 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

"When to Hand Off, When to Work Together": Expanding Human-Agent Co-Creative Collaboration through Concurrent Interaction

arXiv:2603.02050v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As agents move into shared workspaces and their execution becomes visible, human-agent collaboration faces a fundamental shift from sequential delegation to concurrent co-creation. This raises a new coordination problem: what interaction patterns emerge, and what agent capabilities are required to support them? Study 1 (N=10) revealed that process visibility naturally prompted concurrent intervention, but exposed a critical capability gap: agents lacked the collaborative context awareness needed to distinguish user feedback from independent parallel work. This motivated CLEO, a design probe that embodies this capability, interpreting concurrent user actions as feedback or independent work and adapting execution accordingly. Study 2 (N=10) analyzed 214 turn-level interactions, identifying a taxonomy of five action patterns and ten codes, along with six triggers and four enabling factors explaining when and why users shift between collaboration modes. Concurrent interaction appeared in 31.8% of turns. We present a decision model, design implications, and an annotated dataset, positioning concurrent interaction as what makes delegation work better.
Received β€” 11 March 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

Precision Proactivity: Measuring Cognitive Load in Real-World AI-Assisted Work

arXiv:2505.10742v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Systems like ChatGPT and Claude assist billions through proactive dialogue-offering unsolicited, task-relevant information. Drawing on Cognitive Load Theory, we study how cognitive load shapes performance in AI-assisted knowledge work. We recruited 34 financial professionals to complete a complex valuation task using GPT-4o and developed a transcript-based framework estimating intrinsic and extraneous load from computational indicators anchored in a task decomposition and knowledge graph. Across 1,178 participant-subtask observations, AI-generated content usage is positively associated with quality, while extraneous load shows the largest negative association-roughly three times that of intrinsic load. Mediation reveals a compensatory pathway partially offsetting but not eliminating load-related deficits. Extraneous load persists within speakers and spills asymmetrically to model responses. Model-initiated task switching is the strongest predictor of decline. Expertise moderates these dynamics: less experienced professionals face larger penalties and derive greater marginal gains from AI-generated content, yet are not those who most increase uptake under load.
❌