arXiv subjects

Katy Ilonka Gero

Publications and source records attributed to Katy Ilonka Gero.

12 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

FAVoR: Measuring and Mitigating Author-Style Homogenization in Federated Personalized Generation

Large language models are increasingly used as personalized writing assistants, but adapting a model across many authors can compromise individual writing style by pulling author-specific signals toward a shared register. Federated parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) offers a data-local setting for this multi-author adaptation problem: clients keep author text local while sharing compact adapter updates. However, we show that standard aggregation can preserve continuation utility while making different authors' generations less distinguishable in style space, a failure mode we define as author-style homogenization. We evaluate author-style retention with Angular Style Classification Encoder (ASCE)-based diagnostics on our main BlogText benchmark and ASCE-independent external authorship verification. Using this protocol, we find that common federated PEFT baselines can preserve semantic utility while averaging out author-specific signals. To address this homogenization, we instantiate FAVoR (Federated Authorial Voice Retention), an author-style residual mechanism for federated PEFT. FAVoR uses a shared-private adapter design: clients upload shared-adapter updates while retaining author-specific residual corrections locally. Across BlogText and external Mythos-Reddit validation, FAVoR improves author-style retention over standard and personalized federated PEFT baselines. These gains come with small continuation-utility trade-offs and are supported by component ablations, external verification, and cold-start transfer.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Probing How Users Interact with Turn-Level Design Frictions for AI Chatbots

AI chatbots can help people write faster, but they can also encourage overreliance by making it easy to turn minimal input into usable text. We study turn-level design friction: intentional constraints added to each chatbot exchange that slow, limit, or redirect how users request, access, or use model responses. We designed six friction probes, organized around three mechanisms: eliciting user contribution, restricting access to generated content, and reshaping system output. In a within-subject study with 24 participants, all six probes increased workload, task duration, and perceived ownership relative to a conventional AI chatbot, while their effects on recall and recognition were more selective. We further found that participants adapted to friction in different ways, and that the same constraint could support or obstruct involvement depending on users' goals and workflows.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

From Planning to Revision: How AI Writing Support at Different Stages Alters Ownership

Although AI assistance can improve writing quality, it can also decrease feelings of ownership. Ownership in writing has important implications for attribution, rights, norms, and cognitive engagement, and designers of AI support systems may want to consider how system features may impact ownership. We investigate how the stage at which AI support for writing is provided (planning, drafting, or revising) changes ownership. In a study of short essay writing (between subjects, n = 253) we find that while any AI assistance decreased ownership, planning support only minimally decreased ownership, while drafting support saw the largest decrease. This variation maps onto the amount of text and ideas contributed by AI, where more text and ideas from AI decreased ownership. Notably, an AI-generated draft based on participants' own outline resulted in significantly more AI-contributed ideas than AI support for planning. At the same time, more AI contributions improved essay quality. We propose that writers, educators, and designers consider writing stage when introducing AI assistance.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

A Paradigm for Creative Ownership

As generative AI tools become embedded in creative practice, questions of ownership in co-creative contexts are pressing. Yet studies of human-AI collaboration often invoke "ownership" without definition: sometimes conflating it with other concepts, and other times leaving interpretation to participants. This inconsistency makes findings difficult to compare across or even within studies. We introduce a framework of creative ownership comprising three dimensions - Person, Process, and System - each with three subdimensions, offering a shared language for both system design and HCI research. In semi-structured interviews with 21 creative professionals, we found that participants' initial references to ownership (e.g., embodiment, control, concept) were fully encompassed by the framework, demonstrating its coverage. Once introduced, however, they also articulated and prioritized the remaining subdimensions, underscoring how the framework expands reflection and enables richer insights. Our contributions include 1) the framework, 2) a web-based visualization tool, and 3) empirical findings on its utility.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Creative Writers' Attitudes on Writing as Training Data for Large Language Models

The use of creative writing as training data for large language models (LLMs) is highly contentious and many writers have expressed outrage at the use of their work without consent or compensation. In this paper, we seek to understand how creative writers reason about the real or hypothetical use of their writing as training data. We interviewed 33 writers with variation across genre, method of publishing, degree of professionalization, and attitudes toward and engagement with LLMs. We report on core principles that writers express (support of the creative chain, respect for writers and writing, and the human element of creativity) and how these principles can be at odds with their realistic expectations of the world (a lack of control, industry-scale impacts, and interpretation of scale). Collectively these findings demonstrate that writers have a nuanced understanding of LLMs and are more concerned with power imbalances than the technology itself.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Not Just Novelty: A Longitudinal Study on Utility and Customization of an AI Workflow

Generative AI brings novel and impressive abilities to help people in everyday tasks. There are many AI workflows that solve real and complex problems by chaining AI outputs together with human interaction. Although there is an undeniable lure of AI, it is uncertain how useful generative AI workflows are after the novelty wears off. Additionally, workflows built with generative AI have the potential to be easily customized to fit users' individual needs, but do users take advantage of this? We conducted a three-week longitudinal study with 12 users to understand the familiarization and customization of generative AI tools for science communication. Our study revealed that there exists a familiarization phase, during which users were exploring the novel capabilities of the workflow and discovering which aspects they found useful. After this phase, users understood the workflow and were able to anticipate the outputs. Surprisingly, after familiarization the perceived utility of the system was rated higher than before, indicating that the perceived utility of AI is not just a novelty effect. The increase in benefits mainly comes from end-users' ability to customize prompts, and thus potentially appropriate the system to their own needs. This points to a future where generative AI systems can allow us to design for appropriation.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

A Design Space for Intelligent and Interactive Writing Assistants

In our era of rapid technological advancement, the research landscape for writing assistants has become increasingly fragmented across various research communities. We seek to address this challenge by proposing a design space as a structured way to examine and explore the multidimensional space of intelligent and interactive writing assistants. Through a large community collaboration, we explore five aspects of writing assistants: task, user, technology, interaction, and ecosystem. Within each aspect, we define dimensions (i.e., fundamental components of an aspect) and codes (i.e., potential options for each dimension) by systematically reviewing 115 papers. Our design space aims to offer researchers and designers a practical tool to navigate, comprehend, and compare the various possibilities of writing assistants, and aid in the envisioning and design of new writing assistants.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Supporting Sensemaking of Large Language Model Outputs at Scale

Large language models (LLMs) are capable of generating multiple responses to a single prompt, yet little effort has been expended to help end-users or system designers make use of this capability. In this paper, we explore how to present many LLM responses at once. We design five features, which include both pre-existing and novel methods for computing similarities and differences across textual documents, as well as how to render their outputs. We report on a controlled user study (n=24) and eight case studies evaluating these features and how they support users in different tasks. We find that the features support a wide variety of sensemaking tasks and even make tasks previously considered to be too difficult by our participants now tractable. Finally, we present design guidelines to inform future explorations of new LLM interfaces.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2023

Tweetorial Hooks: Generative AI Tools to Motivate Science on Social Media

Communicating science and technology is essential for the public to understand and engage in a rapidly changing world. Tweetorials are an emerging phenomenon where experts explain STEM topics on social media in creative and engaging ways. However, STEM experts struggle to write an engaging "hook" in the first tweet that captures the reader's attention. We propose methods to use large language models (LLMs) to help users scaffold their process of writing a relatable hook for complex scientific topics. We demonstrate that LLMs can help writers find everyday experiences that are relatable and interesting to the public, avoid jargon, and spark curiosity. Our evaluation shows that the system reduces cognitive load and helps people write better hooks. Lastly, we discuss the importance of interactivity with LLMs to preserve the correctness, effectiveness, and authenticity of the writing.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2021

Eliciting Gestures for Novel Note-taking Interactions

Handwriting recognition is improving in leaps and bounds, and this opens up new opportunities for stylus-based interactions. In particular, note-taking applications can become a more intelligent user interface, incorporating new features like autocomplete and integrated search. In this work we ran a gesture elicitation study, asking 21 participants to imagine how they would interact with an imaginary, intelligent note-taking application. We report agreement on the elicited gestures, finding that while existing common interactions are prevalent (like double taps and long presses) a number of more novel interactions (like dragging selected items to hotspots or using annotations) were also well-represented. We discuss the mental models participants drew on when explaining their gestures and what kind of feedback users might need to move to more stylus-centric interactions.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2021

Lightweight Decoding Strategies for Increasing Specificity

Language models are known to produce vague and generic outputs. We propose two unsupervised decoding strategies based on either word-frequency or point-wise mutual information to increase the specificity of any model that outputs a probability distribution over its vocabulary at generation time. We test the strategies in a prompt completion task; with human evaluations, we find that both strategies increase the specificity of outputs with only modest decreases in sensibility. We also briefly present a summarization use case, where these strategies can produce more specific summaries.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2021

Sparks: Inspiration for Science Writing using Language Models

Large-scale language models are rapidly improving, performing well on a wide variety of tasks with little to no customization. In this work we investigate how language models can support science writing, a challenging writing task that is both open-ended and highly constrained. We present a system for generating "sparks", sentences related to a scientific concept intended to inspire writers. We find that our sparks are more coherent and diverse than a competitive language model baseline, and approach a human-created gold standard. In a study with 13 PhD students writing on topics of their own selection, we find three main use cases of sparks: aiding with crafting detailed sentences, providing interesting angles to engage readers, and demonstrating common reader perspectives. We also report on the various reasons sparks were considered unhelpful, and discuss how we might improve language models as writing support tools.

cs.HC↗