Virtual reality (VR) and head-mounted displays are constantly gaining popularity in various fields such as education, military, entertainment, and health. Although such technologies provide a high sense of immersion, they can also trigger symptoms of discomfort. This condition is called cybersickness (CS) and is quite popular in recent virtual reality publications. This work proposes a novel experimental analysis using symbolic machine learning to rank potential causes of CS in VR games. We estimate CS causes and rank them according to their impact using classical machine learning. Experiments are performed using two virtual reality games and 6 experimental protocols along with 37 valid samples from a total of 88 volunteers. Our results show that rotation and acceleration triggered cybersickness more frequently in a flight game in contrast to a race game. We could also observe that subjects that are less experienced with VR are more prone to feel discomfort. Former experience plays a more important role on the race game, as this game provides more liberty to the user in terms of controllers, more displacement alternatives and a more user-controlled acceleration. Furthermore, different causes that trigger discomfort arise based on short or long term VR exposures. We suggest strategies for mitigating CS for these two scenarios: short and long term exposure experiences and compare the two highlighted scenarios (race and flight).

Traditional HCI interaction models assume a single monolithic interface and a stable sensorimotor loop. These models fit poorly with cross-device (XVA) and ubiquitous analytics (UA), where interactive data sensemaking unfolds across multiple devices, artifacts, and people in disparate settings from the office to the factory floor. In this paper, we show how interaction in ubiquitous analytics can be modeled using distributed cognition as propagation of representational state across substrates -- minds, speech, bodies, artifacts, and devices -- rather than as traffic through a single interface. On this basis we introduce input and output channels as generalizations of the visual channels from data visualization: just as visual channels carry data through properties of the visual substrate, input and output channels carry representational state through substrates whose availability, suitability, and preferability depend on context. We demonstrate the channels and substrates framework by reanalyzing several ubiquitous, immersive, and situated analytics systems.

Spatial computing, generative AI, and open web standards are converging. Three spatial operating systems -- Android XR, Meta Horizon OS, and Apple visionOS -- now ship with platform-level scene understanding. Wearable displays span the range from full headsets to slim smartglasses. Agentic AI operates on the same spatial substrates as the human user. This convergence enables new opportunities for \textit{ubiquitous analytics} (UA): the use of many, physically distributed, networked devices to support data sensemaking anytime and anywhere. But proprietary platforms are settling design conventions that will calcify without evidence-based alternatives. UA has now matured to the point where its intellectual history can be read as a structured genealogy of foundations, contributions, and lineages. We trace this genealogy and organize it into clusters spanning cognition, context, interaction, platforms, visualization, collaboration, and evaluation. Finally, we cross these clusters with each other, yielding a total of 42 future research challenges.

Predicting psychological traits from asynchronous video interviews (AVIs) is a challenging multimodal learning problem because labeled datasets are limited while each response contains high-dimensional visual, acoustic, and verbal signals. This paper presents our solution for the ACM Multimedia AVI Challenge 2026, which evaluates two tasks: Track~1 predicts self-reported HEXACO personality traits from personality-related interview responses, and Track~2 classifies cognitive ability levels from structured AVI responses. We treat the problem as a small-sample representation learning task. Instead of fine-tuning large pretrained models, we use frozen multimodal encoders, including CLIP for visual features, Whisper for acoustic features and transcripts, and RoBERTa, E5, and DeBERTaV3 for textual representations, followed by low-capacity downstream models. For Track~1, our trait-specific regression and late-fusion system achieves an average validation MSE of 0.2696, improving over the official baseline of 0.3334. Ablation results show a three-step improvement from a global model (0.3189), to per-trait modeling (0.2871), to per-trait late fusion (0.2696), corresponding to a 19.1\% relative MSE reduction over the official baseline. For Track~2, a compact subject-attribute baseline reaches 0.5781 accuracy, while our multimodal ensemble reaches 0.5313, both above the official baseline of 0.4062. We interpret this result as evidence of possible subject-attribute shortcuts in the validation split rather than robust cognitive inference from AVI content. Overall, our findings suggest that AVI-based psychological assessment benefits from trait-specific multimodal modeling, but cognitive ability prediction requires careful control of dataset shortcuts.

Play-based parent-child interaction offers preschoolers rich opportunities for everyday foreign language learning, yet many parents struggle to turn open-ended play into effective English-as-a-Foreign-Language (EFL) learning experiences at home. To explore how AI might support this process, we conducted formative studies through interviews and a Wizard-of-Oz study. We identified four key challenges: content selection, language expression, balancing instruction and play, and problem solving. To address these challenges, we present PAPEL, a parent-AI collaborative system that grounds suggestions in the ongoing play scene and organizes support into four core modules: content generation, language adaptation, balance assessment, and extended response. In a counterbalanced within-subjects study with 16 parent-child dyads, PAPEL was associated with more integrated parent utterances that combined playful and instructional content, as well as more parent-child conversational turns, than the lightweight chatbot baseline used in our study.

Collecting participants' lived experiences is central to design research. Focus groups are uniquely valuable because participants not only share individual accounts but also respond to one another, surfacing comparison, disagreement, and collective sensemaking. However, focus groups are resource-intensive and highly sensitive to facilitation: moderators must probe for specificity, balance participation, manage topic flow, and sustain psychological safety, and subtle facilitation choices can shape what becomes salient. Recent HCI work and commercial meeting tools show that generative AI can scaffold live conversation through prompting, turn regulation, thematic mapping, and real-time summarization. Yet UXR teams lack a clear map of what these capabilities mean in focus groups and what methodological risks they introduce. We synthesize AI supports for live conversation and translate them into a focus-group-specific playbook organized by AI role (tool, co-host, host) and modality (text, voice, embodied).We synthesize prior work on AI-supported live conversation and propose a focus-group-specific playbook of AI supports organized by role (tool, co-host, host) and modality (text, voice, embodied). We characterize interactional trade-offs and identify open questions for evaluating AI-supported focus groups as methodological configurations.

Opinionated chatbots are increasingly present on online platforms and have the potential to shape public discourse by influencing individuals' viewpoints before they engage in discussions. Despite their growing presence, the impact of interacting with opinionated chatbots on subsequent online interactions remains largely unexplored. This study investigated how exposure to different types of opinionated chatbots, specifically those expressing opposing, reinforcing, or balanced viewpoints, affected participants' subsequent online discussions. In a controlled experiment with 83 participants, we found that interacting with an opinionated chatbot that consistently opposed participants' arguments led to greater shifts in opinion, indicating enhanced openness to revising one's initial stance. Conversely, participants who interacted with a chatbot that consistently reinforced their views were more likely to adopt more agreeable communication styles in subsequent conversations with others. Furthermore, interactions with different types of opinionated chatbots resulted in varying levels of trust, as well as different perceptions of chatbots and human interlocutors. Our findings indicate that opinionated chatbots can influence both individuals' opinions on social topics and their communication behaviors in online environments. This presents a trade-off for future designers seeking to facilitate cognitive flexibility in changing opinions while maintaining positive user experiences and trust in the chatbots during public discourse. We discuss the implications for designing opinionated chatbots to promote more constructive and less polarized online

Generative AI (GenAI) tools offer increasing opportunities for augmenting human cognitive tasks. Among these tasks, information seeking is being rapidly reshaped by GenAI tools, with potentially profound implications for learning and knowledge acquisition. To investigate these implications, we conducted a between-subjects field experiment in which participants pursued informal learning by seeking information through either ChatGPT or Google Search over a span of 8 days. Using a daily diary protocol, we gathered in-situ data on their information-seeking processes. Our findings show that participants in the ChatGPT group experienced diminished agency in their information-seeking processes, as they offloaded much of the information selection to AI, and consequently experienced greater meta-cognitive load arising from this reduced sense of control. We further highlight two sources of distortion in information access when using ChatGPT: biases in ChatGPT outputs, particularly towards providing solution-oriented artifacts over principled knowledge; and systematic shifts in users' information-seeking behaviors, whereby the conversational and socially-oriented interaction paradigm of current GenAI tools may inadvertently reduce exploration of the broader knowledge space. As a result, on average, participants in the ChatGPT group had worse learning outcomes than those using Google, especially for higher-order critical learning. Our work suggests inherent tensions between offloading information seeking to AI and meaningful learning, and provides broader implications for understanding AI's risks to human cognition.

A social highlighter's most useful signal -- which passages a crowd of readers marks -- exists only for documents people have already read. Can the aggregate crowd salience of a document be predicted from its text before its marks accumulate? Prior work on this data found that zero-shot language models recover highlight locations worse than a trivial lead (position) baseline, so we ask whether a model trained on the highlight corpus can beat that baseline. Using a pre-registered ladder of models and a by-document cluster bootstrap, we find a small but robust edge: a logistic ranker over sentence embeddings and positional/contextual features beats the lead baseline by +0.044 average precision (95% CI [+0.029, +0.058]; clears a pre-registered margin delta=0.03 in 97% of resamples, and stable across pipeline re-runs). Two unsupervised extractive baselines (centroid, LexRank-style centrality) lose to lead, and the trained model beats them by +0.108, so the edge is not recovered by generic unsupervised proxies -- it reflects learning from real reader marks. In product terms, precision@3 rises from 0.25 to 0.39 (+55% relative) and the model beats lead on 69% of documents. An ablation attributes the edge to the raw embedding (+0.014) and training augmentation (+0.010), each with a positive CI. The edge is not a temporal-generalization failure, and we find no evidence that content drift or near-duplicate leakage explains it. A standardized regression shows the advantage is governed mainly by document popularity (lower popularity, larger edge) and by label reliability. It nearly vanishes only on the most popular content; there it is the lead baseline that strengthens, not the model that weakens. Because our evaluation conditions on documents that eventually accumulated readers, these results are a retrospective cold-start simulation.

How far can we reduce the number of physical keys if we endow an ambiguous keyboard with modern language models? Fewer keys increase hardware design freedom in constrained settings such as assistive devices and mobile form factors. This paper systematically evaluates text entry systems using 2-5 physical keys combined with language-model-based disambiguation. On a 300-sentence English corpus (100 sentences each for Business / Conversational / Technical), we compare key counts (2-5), letter-to-key mappings (layout-based / frequency-based / intentionally worst-case), and decoders (Trie-only, GPT-2 beam search, GPT-4o selection). We find that 3 keys + GPT-4o achieves character error rate (CER) 9.46% and word error rate (WER) 12.20%, reducing CER by 59% relative to 2 keys (CER 23.3%). At 3 keys, the key-stream entropy is 1.54 bits/char; while increasing to 5 keys improves accuracy (CER 5.4%), the marginal gains diminish. Mapping choice has a small impact under standard designs ({\Delta}CER < 0.5 pp), and even an intentionally worst mapping degrades CER by only +0.5 pp, whereas Technical sentences yield roughly twice the error rate of Business. These results suggest that, in our evaluated offline setting under a strong LM prior, 3 keys are a practical minimum for general English.

When many people highlight the same document, is the crowd a single consensus, or is it internally structured into reader sub-groups that mark different things -- and is that structure a stable property of a reader or of the document? Building on prior work showing an individual's within-document highlighting signal is a whisper while individuality lives in selection, we ask the group-level question on a co-readership platform using a margin-preserving curveball null. Experiment 1: within a document, readers form strong sub-groups -- pairs agree far beyond what shared salience, mark density, and sentence popularity predict (nearest-neighbour agreement z=+6.3, significant in 88% of documents). Under an eight-block region-preserving null, shared engagement with the same coarse regions of the document accounts for about 40% of this excess; the majority survives as finer reader-specific agreement (z=+3.6, 77% significant). So the within-document crowd is, in a descriptive sense, factional. Experiment 2: is that grouping a stable reader trait? Here we are honest about power. The cross-document split-half reproducibility of a pair's agreement is near zero pooled (+0.078 and 0.000 in two separately drawn samples), and a power calibration shows the test is informative only for pairs that co-read many documents. In the only informative high-overlap subset (k>=4), point estimates are positive but small-sample, imprecise across the separately drawn samples, never significant, and attenuate under the region-preserving null. We therefore leave cross-document stability unresolved: the data is consistent with anything from situational grouping to a weak-to-moderate stable reader trait. The crowd is factional within a document; whether its factions follow the reader across documents is, honestly, beyond our reach.

In hierarchical reasoning, failures often originate at intermediate decision points where the agent commits to a wrong branch without recognizing that it lacks critical information. Rather than treating clarification as an external uncertainty trigger, we propose ACTION-RATING, a formulation that places it inside the agent's action space on a shared ordinal scale with navigation, so that asking competes directly with acting at every decision point and help-seeking becomes observable at intermediate states. Two structurally distinct information-seeking modes emerge from the agent's own ratings: mandatory (no viable branch) and opportunistic (residual uncertainty despite a leading candidate). On Harmonized Tariff Schedule classification (30,000-node taxonomy, three benchmarks, 9~LLMs across 4 families), we observe a regime shift from mandatory to opportunistic clarification, with Information-Seeking Effectiveness (ISE), a local diagnostic defined as the fraction of help interactions followed by a correct next navigation step (not a final-task metric), rising from 50% to 74%. Three diagnostic contrasts fail to reproduce this structure. A separability test shows that the information-seeking pattern (mode split, ISE ranking) persists when answer quality is degraded (-18.8% accuracy), supporting an empirical separation between where an agent seeks help and the quality of the help it receives. Under the controlled answer channel, accuracy gains reach +16.2% at 10-digit; we read this as an upper bound on what better localization could unlock, not a deployment estimate.

Sustained driving automation systems are envisioned to be used as the foundation for driverless mobility services. However, both researchers and practitioners acknowledge that current driving automation systems are not yet able to handle all traffic situations that a human driver can handle. To bridge this gap and enable mobility services without an in-vehicle human driver or fallback, remote operation (or teleoperation) is increasingly discussed. Recently, first legal actions have been taken to enable some forms of remote operation on public roads. Remote operation encompasses a broad spectrum of methods to support a driving automation system, ranging from remote assistance, which includes providing information or releasing a maneuver, to remote driving, which includes driving the vehicle from a remote location. As such, safe implementation of remote operation in public road traffic challenges the collaboration of multiple academic disciplines (e.g. engineering, psychology, informatics, law, etc.) and stakeholders (e.g. remote operation service providers, remote operators, vehicle manufacturers, regulatory authorities, etc.). At the same time, the interdisciplinary discourse is often challenging due to differing expectations and language. To build a common ground, this article traces terminology back to the original differences in information processing both on human and vehicle side. This framework aims to help further discourse by directly specifying what is needed to engage a diverse audience including researchers and stakeholders of different backgrounds and interests. Recently discussed forms of teleoperation are integrated into this framework.

Personality assessment aims to infer stable personality traits from dynamic behaviors across language, voice, and facial cues. Since different personality dimensions are revealed through distinct behavioral perspectives, modeling trait-specific evidence is challenging. However, most existing approaches adopt a uniform multimodal fusion strategy across all dimensions, assuming identical modality contributions. This overlooks trait-specific modality preferences and introduces cross-modal interference. To address this issue, we propose a novel personality assessment framework called Traits Run Deeper, which consists of three components. Specifically, the Multimodal Foundation Representation (MFR) module constructs personality-oriented multimodal inputs and leverages psychology-informed semantic templates as anchors, enabling foundation models to capture trait-relevant information. Building upon MFR, the Trait-Specific Modality Fusion (TSMF) module acts as an asymmetric fusion mechanism, allowing each dimension to selectively exploit different modality pathways from modality-specific modeling to complementary fusion. Thus, TSMF captures heterogeneous modality preferences while reducing cross-modal contamination. Furthermore, the Distribution-Calibrated Personality Regression (DCPR) module mitigates label imbalance and central tendency bias through target distribution calibration, improving robustness and stability. Experimental results on the AVI Challenge 2026 validation set demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed framework, reducing mean squared error (MSE) by approximately 25% compared with the baseline. Consistent improvements are observed on the official test set, where our method achieves the best performance and ranks first in the Personality Assessment Track. The source code will be made available at this https URL.

The proliferation of large language models (LLMs) and autonomous AI agents has given rise to a rapidly growing methodological paradigm: "in silico" behavioral experiments. Originally conceived as a way to use AI agents as proxies for human participants in studies of cognition, decision-making, and social dynamics, this approach has taken on new significance -- as AI agents increasingly negotiate, transact, and make consequential decisions on behalf of people and organizations, understanding their behavior has become a research priority in its own right. While these experiments with AI agents offer unprecedented advantages in terms of scalability, cost efficiency, and experimental control, they also inherit, and in some cases amplify, methodological vulnerabilities that have long plagued human subjects research. To address these issues, this paper argues that preregistration practices -- central to improving the credibility of human subjects experiments -- should now be extended to experiments with AI agents. We systematically catalog the researcher degrees of freedom that experiments with AI agents introduce -- model selection, prompt wording, settings, and outcome-contingent redesign, for example -- and show how the low cost of iteration and lack of reporting norms make these choices both easy to exploit and difficult to detect. We propose a preregistration template tailored to experiments with AI agents and call on conferences, journals, and funding agencies to make preregistration standard practice for this emerging research paradigm.

Algorithmic fairness is essential for responsible ML-driven public health research, yet its practical implementation remains limited. To investigate this awareness-action gap, we conducted a sequential mixed-methods study comprising expert interviews, an online survey, and systematic mapping. The expert interviews informed the design of the survey, which in turn revealed fragmented definitions of fairness, limited training and guidance, reliance on external sources, and rare use of formal assessment, mitigation, or monitoring. These findings were subsequently mapped onto three established research-practice gap lenses: the Knowledge-Practice Gap, the Knowledge-to-Action Cycle, and the Knowing-Doing Gap, each offering complementary perspectives. Building on this synthesis, we introduce the Fairness-to-Action framework, which integrates methodological, organizational, and systemic dimensions to identify where translation of algorithmic fairness knowledge stalls. Our analysis shows that fairness remains weakly institutionalized, translation mechanisms are externally driven, and system-level priorities continue to emphasize accuracy over fairness. These insights suggest critical leverage points for advancing safe, fair, and ethical ML-driven public health research practice.

Large language models (LLMs) have transformed how humans access information, but not how we reason with it. Their fluency accelerates consumption while bypassing the slow, reflective processes that underpin sound judgment. This paper introduces Relational Reflective Intelligence (RRI), an inference-time governance layer that operationalizes reflection through auditable reasoning loops. RRI operates not inside the model but around it, providing a practical structure for stable, auditable reasoning between humans and LLMs. The core premise is that LLMs inherit cognitive vulnerabilities similar to those that shape human thought: reliance on intuitive shortcuts, confusion between representation and reality, and a preference for coherence over falsification. When humans and models share these tendencies, their errors compound. We refer to this as relational drift, a failure that arises from interaction rather than from the model alone. Addressing this requires a shift from modeling relations between words to structuring relations between model outputs and human reasoning. RRI provides this missing layer through three components: the Rose-Frame, which identifies likely breakdowns in reasoning; the Architect's Pen, which introduces targeted reflection steps at critical moments; and an inference-time workflow that embeds these steps without retraining the model. Together, these elements transform human-AI interaction into a joint reasoning system with explicit checkpoints, conflict surfacing, and an auditable trail of assumptions. Rather than making machines think like humans or forcing humans to reason like machines, RRI creates a structured interaction in which both compensate for each other's limitations. It reframes AI safety as a cognitive architecture problem, where reliable decisions depend on embedding reflection directly into the interaction process.

Postprandial hyperglycemia is a key risk factor for metabolic disorders; however, existing dietary guidance is often static, impractical, and insufficiently personalized, providing recommendations that are difficult to follow or not impactful. While recent advances leverage continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and machine learning to predict glycemic responses, these approaches are largely predictive and lack actionable guidance. Moreover, recommendation systems are often misaligned with user goals and require extensive input. We present MetaPlate, a counterfactual explanation (CF) guided, context-aware decision-support framework that generates personalized meal recommendations to mitigate postprandial glucose excursions in healthy adults. MetaPlate integrates multimodal data, including CGM readings, wearable-derived physiological signals, and user-provided meal inputs from $25$ individuals to model pre-meal context. A machine learning model predicts glucose response, while a CF optimization module adjusts meal composition modifying macronutrient amounts to maintain glucose levels within a target range ($\leq 140$ mg/dL). An LLM-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) layer enhances interpretability by producing human-readable recommendations using constrained search of the USDA food database. We evaluate MetaPlate via a structured expert-in-the-loop assessment with registered dietitians (RDs), comparing performance before and after prompt refinement. Results show improvements in meal realism, portion suitability, and recommendation likelihood, with expert feedback indicating a shift from clinically implausible outputs to actionable, contextually appropriate recommendations. Our findings emphasize the importance of domain knowledge and structured constraints in LLM-driven systems and highlight the potential of MetaPlate as a real-time personalized dietary decision-support tool.

Large language models can translate a researcher's intent into runnable matplotlib code, yet the resulting chart rarely lands in a paper without multiple rounds of manual revision. We argue that the open problem is not chart code generation but chart publication: making the output look like a top-venue figure, survive the target layout, and respond to precise author edits. We present chart-plot, an agentic harness that closes this last mile through three components: (1) a style-aware code generator conditioned on a textual style skill distilled from accepted figures at the target venue, (2) a deployment-aware render loop that compiles the chart inside the target LaTeX context and revises until layout constraints are met, and (3) a structured edit layer that exposes every chart element as a directly manipulable handle. We report early results on three chart-type case studies (grouped bar, scaling line, paired distributions) and a small user study.

AI coding assistants are now central to professional software development, yet their impact on how developers think about and practice security remains poorly understood. While prior work has documented vulnerability rates in AI-generated code, a more fundamental question persists: how do these tools transform security awareness in authentic, ongoing development practice? We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 professional software engineers and observed them completing security-relevant coding tasks with AI assistance, spanning 3 experience cohorts defined by their relationship to AI tools during professional formation. We find that AI coding assistants reorganize rather than eliminate security thinking, shifting it from the act of writing code to the act of reviewing it. This transition from preventive to reactive security is structurally encouraged by interaction models that frame code generation as a functional task, leaving security as an afterthought. Notably, none of our coding session participants specified security requirements in their initial prompts, even when they possessed the relevant knowledge, revealing a decoupling of security awareness from security behavior. We further document informal coping strategies developers had independently invented to manage AI security risk, none of which are supported by current tools or organizations, and find that the experience cohort did not reliably predict security performance. This paper contributes a practice-grounded account of how AI-assisted development reshapes the human side of secure coding, offering empirical foundations for the design of more security-aware tools, training programs, and organizational policies.

Making high-stakes personal decisions involves cognitive, emotional, and intuitive processes, and individuals differ in how they allocate attention across these modes. Integration of these processes has shown to benefit decision making. Yet, most current decision-support systems focus primarily on supporting cognitive aspects, rather than adapting to the individual's thinking profile to support integration of different types of thoughts. In this study, we investigate an agent designed to encourage integration by adapting to the individual user's thought patterns. We explore its effects on participants' perceptions of the agent and their reflective behavior, in comparison with unaided pre-reflection and a baseline agent. In a between-subjects study (N = 128), our agent, which fostered broad and elaborated thinking, enabled more personalized reflective trajectories, elicited more integrative reflective language, and was perceived as providing stronger support for holistic reflection. In contrast, the baseline agent produced homogenized profiles dominated by cognitive language across participants.

Aging combined sewer systems in many historical cities are increasingly stressed by extreme rainfall events, which can trigger combined sewer overflows (CSO) with significant environmental and public health impacts. Forecasting the filling dynamics of overflow basins is critical for anticipating capacity exceedance and enabling timely preventive actions for CSO. We present a web-based demonstrator that integrates Deep Learning forecasting methods in both cloud and edge settings into an interactive monitoring dashboard for overflow monitoring, resilient to network outages. A video showcase is available online ( this https URL ).

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping many societal domains, raising critical questions about its risks, benefits, and the potential misalignment between public and academic perspectives. This study examines how the general public (N=1110) -- individuals who interact with or are impacted by AI technologies -- and academic AI experts (N=119) -- those elites shaping AI development -- perceive AI's capabilities and impact across 71 scenarios. These scenarios span domains such as sustainability, healthcare, job performance, societal inequality, art, and warfare. Participants evaluated these scenarios across four dimensions using the psychometric model: likelihood, perceived risk and benefit, and overall value (or sentiment). The results suggest significant differences: experts consistently anticipate higher probabilities, perceive lower risks, report greater benefits, and express more positive sentiment toward AI compared to the non-experts. Moreover, both groups apply different weighting schemes: experts discount risk more heavily relative to benefit than non-experts. Visual mappings of these evaluations uncover areas convergent evaluations (e.g., AI performing medical diagnoses or criminal use) as well as tension points (e.g., decision of legal cases, political decision making), highlighting areas where communication and policy interventions may be needed. These findings underscore a critical translational challenge: if AI research and deployment are to align with societal priorities, the perception gap between developers and the public must be better understood and addressed. Our results provide an empirical foundation for value-sensitive AI governance and trust-building strategies across stakeholder groups.

Purpose: Developing and testing a framework that integrates real-time catheter shape reconstruction, interactive simulations, and mixed reality visualization to enable accurate monitoring of catheter-vessel interactions during endovascular navigation. Methods: A finite element model (FEM) of the venous pathway from the right femoral vein to the inferior vena cava was generated from computed tomography data and implemented into an interactive simulation. Catheter motion was imposed as boundary condition, and catheter-vessel contact was modeled with a Lagrange multiplier formulation to compute vessel deformation. The framework was tested in-vitro using a sensorized catheter with Fiber Bragg Grating and electromagnetic sensors as it was advanced through a silicone replica of the vascular anatomy. Real-time sensor read-outs fed the simulation, and the updated catheter and vessel geometries were streamed to Hololens 2. The performance and accuracy of FEM-computed vessel wall displacement were validated against experimental ground-truth obtained via stereo frames triangulation. Results: The simulated time exceeded the real temporal extent by 12% during initial navigation and by 45% when the catheter reached the most tortuous portion. Hololens 2 rendering remained stable at 35-40 frames per second. The median relative displacement error between FEM-computed and ground-truth vessel wall displacements remained below 1 mm and 2.33 mm for these two phases, respectively. Conclusion: The study demonstrates the feasibility of integrating interactive biomechanical simulation with real-time sensor data to enable continuous monitoring of catheter-vessel interactions, with mixed reality visualization serving as a user interface to support operator decision-making.

Percutaneous epicardial access (PEA), performed on a beating heart under fluoroscopy, enables arrhythmia treatment. However, advancing a needle toward the thin and moving pericardium remains highly challenging and risky. To address this problem, we present a physics-driven sonification method for Extended Reality (XR)-based multisensory navigation to enhance user perception during the critical needle landing phase in PEA. Dynamic cardiac anatomy from 4D CTA was reconstructed and registered to a real-world coordinate system. Real-time needle tracking provided the position of the needle tip relative to moving cardiac structures and drove an audio-visual feedback module. The visual display presented navigational cues and dynamic anatomy, while the auditory display encoded physiological cardiac states using a multilayer physical membrane model. A phantom study was conducted with twelve cardiologists performing needle insertions under visual-only and multisensory feedback. The multisensory method significantly improved navigation safety ($χ^2 = 11.30$, $p < 0.01$), reducing myocardial contact (3.64% vs. 7.27%) and increasing correct access (90.91% vs. 52.73%). Needle placement accuracy improved, with closer membrane proximity (Cliff delta = 0.19) and reduced variability ($p < 0.05$). Execution time was comparable, while time-accuracy correlations differed significantly between modalities ($p < 0.01$). NASA-TLX indicated lower cognitive load with multisensory guidance ($p < 0.01$). These results demonstrate the feasibility of physics-driven sonification for improving spatiotemporal awareness and supporting user-centered surgical navigation.

Online platforms rely on moderation interventions to curb harmful behavior such as hate speech, toxicity, and the spread of mis- and disinformation. Yet research on the effects and possible biases of such interventions faces multiple limitations. For example, existing works frequently focus on single or a few interventions, due to the absence of comprehensive datasets. As a result, researchers must typically collect the necessary data for each new study, which limits opportunities for systematic comparisons. To overcome these challenges, we introduce The Big Ban Theory (TBBT) -- a large dataset of moderation interventions. TBBT covers 25 interventions of varying type, severity, and scope, comprising in total over 339K users and nearly 39M posted messages on Reddit and Voat. For each intervention, we provide standardized metadata and pseudonymized user activity collected three months before and after its enforcement, enabling consistent and comparable analyses of intervention effects. In addition, we provide a descriptive exploratory analysis of the dataset, along with several use cases of how it can support research on content moderation. With this dataset, we aim to support researchers studying the effects of moderation interventions and to promote more systematic, reproducible, and comparable research.

Water has long served as a recipient of human confession across cultures. We present \textit{Whispering Water}, an interactive installation that materializes human-AI dialogue through cymatic patterns on water. Participants confess to a water surface, triggering a four-phase ritual: confession, contemplation, response, and release. Speech sentiment is translated into excitation frequencies that prime the water's physical state, while semantic content enters a multi-agent system of heterogeneous LLMs whose identities emerge through situated discourse. A novel algorithm decomposes synthesized speech into harmonic components via logarithmic spacing and Bark-scale mapping, reconstructing machine voices as physical wave superpositions. The installation explores emotional self-exploration through sensory-rich, ritually framed human-AI interaction.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a popular declarative reasoning and problem solving approach in symbolic AI. Its rule-based formalism makes it inherently attractive for explainable and interpretive reasoning, which is gaining importance with the surge of Explainable AI (XAI). A number of explanation approaches and tools for ASP have been developed, which often tackle specific explanatory settings and may not cover all scenarios that ASP users encounter. In this survey, we provide, guided by an XAI perspective, an overview of types of ASP explanations in connection with user questions for explanation, and describe their coverage by current theory and tools. Furthermore, we pinpoint gaps in existing ASP explanations approaches and identify research directions for future work.

More than half of the 1.19 million annual traffic fatalities globally involve vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians, with a significant proportion attributable to human error. Level-5 automated driving systems (ADSs) have the potential to reduce these incidents; However, their effectiveness depends not only on automation performance but also on their ability to communicate intent and coordinate safely with pedestrians in the absence of traditional driver cues. This study aims to model pedestrian decision-making in road-crossing scenarios involving level-5 ADSs by extending the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) with safety, trust, compatibility, and understanding. An online survey (n = 212) found that perceived behavioral control, attitude, and social information significantly influence pedestrians' crossing intentions, with perceived safety and understanding having the strongest effects on the TPB constructs. The results offer guidance for designing eHMIs and cooperative V2X communication strategies that promote safe pedestrian-ADS interactions and advance human-centered design for autonomous vehicles.

Large language models (LLMs) based Agents are increasingly pivotal in simulating and understanding complex human systems and interactions. We propose the AI-Agent School (AAS) system, built around a self-evolving mechanism that leverages agents for simulating complex educational dynamics. Addressing the fragmented issues in teaching process modeling and the limitations of agents performance in simulating diverse educational participants, AAS constructs the Zero-Exp strategy, employs a continuous "experience-reflection-optimization" cycle, grounded in a dual memory base comprising experience and knowledge bases and incorporating short-term and long-term memory components. Through this mechanism, agents autonomously evolve via situated interactions within diverse simulated school scenarios. This evolution enables agents to more accurately model the nuanced, multi-faceted teacher-student engagements and underlying learning processes found in physical schools. Experiment confirms that AAS can effectively simulate intricate educational dynamics and is effective in fostering advanced agent cognitive abilities, providing a foundational stepping stone from the "Era of Experience" to the "Era of Simulation" by generating high-fidelity behavioral and interaction data.