arXiv:2602.13452v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed for crisis preparedness and response, particularly for multilingual communication. However, their suitability for high-stakes crisis contexts remains insufficiently evaluated. This work examines the performance of state-of-the-art LLMs and machine translation systems in crisis-domain translation, with a focus on preserving urgency, which is a critical property for effective crisis communication and triaging. Using multilingual crisis data and a newly introduced urgency-annotated dataset covering over 32 languages, we show that both dedicated translation models and LLMs exhibit substantial performance degradation and instability. Crucially, even linguistically adequate translations can distort perceived urgency, and LLM-based urgency classifications vary widely depending on the language of the prompt and input. These findings highlight significant risks in deploying general-purpose language technologies for crisis communication and underscore the need for crisis-aware evaluation frameworks.

arXiv:2602.13488v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Pilot studies (PS) are ubiquitous in HCI research. CHI papers routinely reference 'pilot studies', 'pilot tests', or 'preliminary studies' to justify design decisions, verify procedures, or motivate methodological choices. Yet despite their frequency, the role of pilot studies in HCI remains conceptually vague and empirically underexamined. Unlike fields such as medicine, nursing, and education, where pilot and feasibility studies have well-established definitions, guidelines, reporting standards and even a dedicated research journal, the CHI community lacks a shared understanding of what constitutes a pilot study, why they are conducted, and how they should be reported. Many papers reference pilots 'in passing', without details about design, outcomes, or how the pilot informed the main study. This variability suggests a methodological blind spot in our community.