Papers for

product designers

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Paired depth images enable mold-friendly shape design and optimization

CAST: Cast-Admissible Generative Design and Shape Optimization with Paired Depth Images

Abstract: Deep generative design can produce complex geometries, but unconstrained representations may create undercuts that prevent release from a two-part mold. We present CAST, which reformulates three-dimensional shape generation under a selected mold-opening constraint as a two-dimensional image generation problem using paired top and bottom depth images. Each valid depth pair defines one material interval along a selected mold-opening direction, so reconstructions exclude undercuts in that direction by construction. Diffusion models generate candidate shapes in this representation, and a finite element analysis (FEA) guided optimizer refines the same two boundaries. We evaluate diffusion-based generation with limited training data comprising 211 SimJEB bracket designs. On SimJEB brackets, FEA-guided refinement with a volume penalty reduced compliance in 193 of 200 generated candidates. The median reduction across all candidates was 36.8 percent in the optimization FEA model. Reconstruction of existing brackets revealed a mass--stiffness trade-off: filling occluded regions increased material volume and reduced displacement under the evaluated loads. Paired depth images thus connect generative exploration and structural refinement in a shared design space that preserves the selected pull-direction restriction.

Mon 19 OctMachine Learning
The gist
Designing complex 3D shapes for molding is tricky because some shapes can get stuck due to undercuts. The paper presents a method that turns 3D shapes into two 2D depth images, which ensures the shapes can be removed from a mold properly. They use AI to create new shapes and then improve those shapes by testing how strong and stiff they are. This approach helps designers make shapes that balance material use and strength while fitting mold constraints.
Open → 2610.26309v1

Human ideas fill gaps in ai thinking with equal or better creativity

Thinking Outside the Bots: Human Ideas in AI's Semantic Blind Spots Are Not Inferior

Abstract: AI-generated outputs are frequently perceived as highly creative, but also tend to be more similar to each other (homogenized) than human ideas. Does the human heterogeneity that extends beyond AI reflect valuable thinking that AI misses? Alternatively, is greater human heterogeneity driven by lower-quality ideas and less effective thinking that AI avoids? We developed Expansion of Divergent Generative Expression (EDGE) to map AI's semantic "blind spots" by assessing how strongly/weakly individual human ideas were represented in a task-matched AI semantic comparison set. Specifically, we compared human-generated vs. AI-generated ideas across three open-ended tasks: college admissions essays, alternative uses for everyday objects, and interpersonal advice. Across all three tasks, human responses extended into semantic regions sparsely covered by AI outputs. These distinctively human responses showed no meaningful deficits in creativity, quality, or effectiveness, were associated with equal-or-better academic performance, and with credibly superior ratings and achievement for some outcomes. These ideas were thus not merely poor-performing variation; they performed as well as or better than ideas that overlapped more strongly with AI ideas. More distinctive human ideas tended to receive higher creativity ratings, but this relationship was weak or reversed for AI ideas. Taken together, these results suggest that differentiation among human-generated ideas does not reflect poor thinking that AI can safely omit, and instead may afford both individual and population-level advantages.

Mon 12 OctComputation and LanguageArtificial IntelligenceComputers and Society
The gist
AI often produces similar ideas, while humans generate more varied thoughts. This paper shows that the ideas humans come up with in areas where AI struggles are just as creative and effective as those AI produces. In fact, some unique human ideas can be even better than AI ideas. So, the differences in how humans think are not mistakes or poor-quality ideas but valuable ways to think differently.
Open → 2610.17324v1

Listwise interfaces improve human feedback in optimization tasks

Rethinking Opinion Measurement Interfaces for Human-in-the-Loop Optimization

Abstract: Human-in-the-loop optimization refers to systems that present choices to a human decision-maker and query their judgment to optimize system parameters iteratively. The user interface typically provides either an absolute rating scale or asks for a preferred option. However, these approaches can potentially suffer from calibration problems, inconsistencies, and completeness violations of user preferences in such a sequential evaluation. This paper revisits the design space of opinion measurement interfaces for human-in-the-loop optimization. We conducted a study (N=360) using text summarization and image color enhancement tasks to evaluate human sequential feedback in six representative opinion measurement interfaces. Based on our analysis, we recommend using a listwise approach to support sequential opinion measurement, which counterweighs individual rating and preferential choice limitations and conveys more information for subsequent use. We further discuss the trade-offs in different user interface designs and provide guidelines to inform future research.

Sat 10 OctHuman-Computer InteractionMachine Learning
The gist
Human-in-the-loop optimization means a system tries to learn what people prefer by asking them to make choices or give ratings over time. However, usual ways of collecting these opinions, like rating scales or picking preferred options, can lead to inconsistent or incomplete feedback. The authors studied six different ways to collect opinions on text and image tasks from 360 people. They found that showing a list of options and asking for feedback on all at once works better than single ratings or choices. This approach helps the system learn more and makes the feedback more reliable.
Open → 2610.14757v1

Ai systems need active questions to find true user preferences

From Observation to Intervention: Identifiability of Latent User Bias in Human-AI Interaction

Abstract: Alignment methods typically treat user behavior as a reliable proxy for underlying preferences. However, this assumption breaks down when users hold belief-dependent cognitive biases, risking irreversible ``confirmation traps'' and harmful feedback loops. In this paper, we formalize when an AI system can distinguish true user preferences from behavior shaped by cognitive bias. Modeling this interaction as a multi-armed bandit, we first prove a non-identifiability theorem: under passive observation, a static binary biased user produces action trajectory distributions strictly identical to an unbiased user in a transformed environment, forcing any action-only estimator to perform no better than random guessing. We then show that active preference elicitation breaks this observational equivalence. Specifically, we prove that an Observer applying a finite sequence of adversarial zero-reward interventions of length $m_δ$ makes the post-intervention action distributions arbitrarily separable. Our theoretical results suggest that robust alignment requires actively intervening to tell informed preferences from biases.

Fri 9 OctHuman-Computer Interaction
The gist
User actions often help AI guess what people want, but sometimes people’s choices are skewed by strong beliefs, causing the AI to get confused. The authors explain that just watching what users do isn’t enough for AI to separate true preferences from biased actions. They prove that by actively asking users specific questions or creating situations where choices lead to no rewards, AI can better identify real user preferences and avoid harmful feedback loops.
Open → 2610.13185v1

Spaceflow enables precise local control in 3d object generation

SpaceFlow: Locally Controllable 3D Generation

Abstract: Current 3D generation methods lack explicit local control: geometric adherence is often defined by a global control strength, and appearance cannot be specified locally. We present SpaceFlow, a training-free pipeline for locally controllable 3D generation from text descriptions and a collection of geometric primitives. Each primitive serves as a proxy for an object part and is assigned a local control level, enabling users to specify whether regions should strictly follow the input shape or allow generative completion. During structure generation, we enforce these spatial constraints within the generative flow process. For appearance synthesis, the generated structure is segmented and matched to the primitives. Each generated part is conditioned only on its assigned text or image cue, thereby limiting cross-part leakage. Regional geometry metrics demonstrate that SpaceFlow preserves the specified geometry in high-control regions and enables plausible shape variation in low-control areas. A user study further indicates that the resulting balance between geometric fidelity and generative freedom remains competitive in overall quality. When evaluating appearance on fixed geometry, text-conditioned routing achieves state-of-the-art prompt faithfulness and color/material accuracy. Qualitative results additionally show localized routing of image cues. The project page is available at SpaceFlow3D.github.io.

Thu 8 OctComputer Vision and Pattern RecognitionArtificial IntelligenceGraphics
The gist
Creating 3D objects using current methods often means you can only control the overall shape, not details in specific parts. The authors developed SpaceFlow, which lets you guide the shape and look of individual parts of a 3D object using simple shapes and text or images. This means you can keep some parts exactly how you want while letting other parts vary creatively. Their approach works without extra training and produces 3D models that match local specifications well and look good to people who use them.
Open → 2610.12399v1

Human centered AI should model multiple valid interpretations

Whose Ground Truth? Embracing Ambiguity in Human-Centered AI

Abstract: As AI systems increasingly interact with people and make decisions about them, understanding human interpretations becomes an important part of developing human-centered AI. Conventional machine learning and AI systems are largely developed under the assumption that a single definitive ground truth exists, with variability in human annotations often resolved through aggregation or treated as noise. However, for many human-centered tasks, human interpretation is inherently ambiguous, and multiple interpretations of the same input may be simultaneously reasonable and valid. Reducing such ambiguity to a single target risks overlooking meaningful information about the diversity of human perception, judgment, and experience. In this position paper, we call for a shift towards modeling the interpretation space of plausible human judgments, while distinguishing meaningful ambiguity from annotation noise. We argue that this perspective should guide how AI systems are represented, learned, evaluated, deployed, and governed, supporting more human-centered AI that better reflects the diversity of human interpretation.

Wed 7 OctArtificial IntelligenceMachine Learning
The gist
Many AI systems assume there is one correct answer when interpreting human-related data, but people often see the same thing in different, equally valid ways. The authors argue that instead of forcing AI to pick a single answer, systems should acknowledge and represent this ambiguity. This approach would better reflect how real people think and experience things, leading to AI that respects diverse perspectives. They suggest changes in how AI is designed, trained, evaluated, and governed to include multiple human interpretations rather than just one.
Open → 2610.10805v1

LLM agents tested for creating practical and buildable 3D structures

LMBuild: Evaluating LLM Agents for Generating Buildable and Functional Structures

Abstract: LLM-based agents are increasingly capable of generating complex 3D structures, with the potential to reshape how objects are designed and realized in the physical world. Yet, producing elegant geometry is fundamentally different from producing objects that can be built and perform their intended functions. Existing evaluations largely focus on geometric quality while overlooking physical realizability. We introduce LMBuild, a benchmark for evaluating LLM agents on generating buildable and functional structures. LMBuild represents generated objects as assembled structures comprising part decompositions, joints, materials, and sequences. To support reproducible evaluation, we provide a unified framework consisting of: (1) an interactive environment in which agents can use tools to retrieve, create, and place components to construct objects; (2) a curated benchmark that repurposes established CAD datasets and augments them with knowledge from Wikipedia; and (3) a evaluation framework covering structural soundness, functional affordance, design quality, and physical realization. Evaluations across 30 systems reveal several intriguing findings: (a) Soundness and alignment are no longer the primary bottlenecks for frontier closed-source models, while functional affordance and physical operability remain substantially more challenging; (b) stronger models more effectively create new components, whereas weaker models tend to rely on retrieval; and (c) providing functional specifications substantially improves part completeness, kinematics, and physical operability. These results show that generating real-world structures requires deeper reasoning about functional affordances, mechanics, and designing and creating novel components. We expect LMBuild to provide a foundation for measuring progress and incentivizing research toward agents that generate buildable and functional structures.

Sat 3 OctArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Creating 3D designs that look good is different from making objects that can actually be built and work well. The authors present LMBuild, a way to test AI agents on making structures that are not only attractive but also buildable and functional. They provide a platform to build objects piece by piece and measure how strong, functional, and realistic the designs are. Their tests show that while modern AI models handle basic design well, making parts that work properly and can be assembled is still tough. The study helps focus future efforts on creating AI that deeply understands how to make things that truly work in the real world.
Open → 2610.04292v1

Answer generation stabilizes before explanation unfolds in AI systems

Two Clocks in Diffusion MLLMs: When Answers Stabilize Before Rationales Unfold

Abstract: An answer candidate in a masked diffusion MLLM can stabilize while its rationale is still unfolding. We distinguish retrospective stabilization of the logged candidate from token commitment, and examine these two clocks relative to rationale generation. Analyzing our results across three visual question-answering benchmarks, we find that 89.4-98.1% of the rationale-side canvas remains unwritten at stabilization in single-block, EOS-suppressed LaViDa runs. On V*Bench, reducing block length from 128 to 8 changes this fraction from 89.4% to 1.7%, together with answer coverage and the eligible observation window. Under EOS-enabled prompting, direct instructions improve Nemotron's overall accuracy by 15.0 and 19.5 percentage points on M3CoT and ScienceQA, but reduce LaViDa/V*Bench accuracy by 11.0 points. A symmetric decomposition associates the larger absolute component of each change with coverage rather than conditional accuracy. Matched-canvas image ablations measure visual sensitivity alongside answer stabilization, separating the two temporal readouts. Together, these measurements distinguish answer stabilization, rationale unfolding, and visual sensitivity, and identify coverage as the larger component of the prompting differences.

Thu 1 OctComputer Vision and Pattern RecognitionArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Some AI models give answers that settle quickly while their explanations keep developing. The authors studied this timing difference, finding that most of the explanation remains unwritten when the answer appears stable. Changing how the model processes information affects both how complete the answers are and how much context it uses. Their work shows there's a difference between when answers become fixed and when the reasoning behind them is fully formed.
Open → 2610.00953v1

Scanvas system helps designers find linked ideas that create more value

Scanvas: Discovering and Developing Synergistic Opportunities in Generative Design Spaces

Abstract: Good design is often synergistic, creating super-additive value by linking goals so that existing resources produce greater outcomes. However, finding these synergistic opportunities in sparse design spaces is difficult, and current LLM-supported ideation tools largely default to additive paradigms such as feature blending, variant generation, or local patching. We present Scanvas, an AI-supported system for systematically discovering and developing synergistic design opportunities. Scanvas operationalizes synergy through a two-step computational process: first, it decomposes seed ideas into explicit properties (components, behaviors, surpluses, and issues) to enrich the design space; second, it systematically searches across enriched ideas using three theory-grounded strategy operators: unlocking or strengthening goals, turning weaknesses into resources, and sharing components across functions. We instantiate Scanvas as an auto-generation pipeline and an interactive system. Pipeline ablations and a user study with 12 professional designers demonstrate that Scanvas enables users to surface and develop significantly higher-quality, synergistic concepts compared to LLM ideation baselines.

Mon 28 SeptHuman-Computer Interaction
The gist
Good design can be more than just adding features—it can create extra value by combining goals in smart ways, but finding these combinations is hard. The authors developed Scanvas, a tool that breaks down ideas into parts and then looks for ways to link goals, fix weaknesses, or share components to make better designs. Their tests with professional designers showed Scanvas helps find more valuable and creative ideas than existing AI tools. This system aims to support designers in exploring design spaces more effectively and discover new opportunities.
Open → 2609.34062v1

AI agents show consistent behavior traits differing from self reports

On the Behavioral Traits of LLM Agents

Abstract: Users increasingly describe different AI agents as distinct colleagues to work with. AI personality research aims to quantify such impressions by attributing human-like "traits" to agents. However, existing measures fall short: models' self-reports (S-data) diverge from their actual behavior, while informant ratings from LLM judges (I-data) are costly to scale and cover few everyday scenarios. In this paper, we propose A-B-D to infer traits bottom-up from behavioral data (B-data), namely how agents act on their environment and communicate with users, as recorded in existing trajectories. From 345,667 real-world trajectories spanning 80 models, 12 tasks, and 50 harnesses, we extract 318 candidate features that capture both the actions an agent takes at each step (functional) and the language accompanying them (linguistic). We retain only features that show instance-level stability, cross-task consistency, and model discriminability. Factor analysis of the remaining 79 features uncovers six stable, model-attributable factors, two functional and four linguistic. For example, Kimi-K3 exhibits the most planfulness, whereas GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6 are the least energetic. Moreover, we quantify the "knowledge-action gap" in the wild: these factors correlate only weakly with self-reported Big Five scores, even for conceptually matched pairs such as extroversion and energetic (r = 0.07, p = 0.58). Our work offers a new lens for understanding AI personality, with implications for users, developers, and researchers from both computer science and social science.

Sat 26 SeptComputation and Language
The gist
People often think of AI agents as having unique personalities, but measuring these traits is tricky. The authors found that what AI agents say about themselves doesn't match how they actually behave. To solve this, they looked at hundreds of thousands of real interactions with many AI models to identify consistent behavior patterns. They discovered six reliable traits that describe how AI agents act, especially through their actions and language. These traits don’t line up well with the agents’ self-described personalities, suggesting a gap between knowledge and behavior in AI.
Open → 2609.32776v1

Interacting with AI temporarily shifts human values toward self-interest

Deflecting the Value Compass: Interacting with Large Language Models Temporarily Shifts Human Value Priorities Toward Personal Focus

Abstract: Large language models increasingly support decisions where values are in tension, yet little is known about whether interacting with them changes which values users prioritize. In a preregistered study, 200 U.S. adults interacted with ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini as a thinking partner or read fixed AI-generated considerations. The prompt asked LLMs to support reasoning without recommending a decision and named no values. Participants advised people facing real dilemmas and completed parallel PVQ-RR forms before, immediately after, and one task later. Each LLM condition temporarily shifted value priorities toward personal focus relative to the control (d=0.37-0.51), primarily through increased Self-Enhancement. Participants' advice retained words and meaning from their exchanges. Thus, a brief LLM interaction that neither targets values nor seeks to persuade can reorient values active during judgment without detectable convergence in value directions or advice.

Tue 22 SeptHuman-Computer InteractionArtificial Intelligence
The gist
People often turn to AI tools like ChatGPT for help with tough decisions involving values. This study by the authors found that even a short conversation with AI can temporarily make people focus more on themselves and their own interests. The AI did not try to persuade or suggest values, but the interaction still influenced what mattered most to humans right after. Interestingly, people's advice still reflected what they talked about with the AI without changing the advice's meaning.
Open → 2609.25586v1

Designer tool lets users shape AI-generated user interfaces

GUIDE: Designer-in-the-loop Authoring of Conformant Generative User Interfaces

Abstract: Generative User Interfaces (GenUIs) enable applications to generate interfaces on demand from user needs and context. Like conventional UIs, they must still reflect designers' intent and conform to requirements such as brand identity. Unlike conventional UIs, designers cannot directly specify or see every interface a GenUI may produce, making design intent harder to enforce. We introduce GUIDE (GenUI Development Environment), a system that lets designers continuously inspect and refine GenUI behavior as they create and edit interfaces. GUIDE uses designers' modifications and interactions to adapt GenUIs through prompt optimization and a novel adaptive conformance scoring model. We validate GUIDE's scoring model and system. The scoring model matched or outperformed proprietary LLM baselines on held-out comparisons of real and synthetic application screens. In a study with 12 UI/UX practitioners, participants found GUIDE effective and usable and significantly preferred aligned outputs over a strong baseline using exemplars and a model-generated design.md.

Fri 18 SeptHuman-Computer Interaction
The gist
Creating user interfaces with AI is tricky because designers can’t always see or control what the AI will produce. The authors introduce a system called GUIDE that helps designers inspect and tweak AI-generated interfaces as they build them. GUIDE learns from the designer’s feedback and uses a new way to score how well the AI’s designs match the designer’s goals. Tests showed GUIDE works well compared to other methods, and designers liked it because it gave them more control over the AI’s output.
Open → 2609.21285v1

Geometry aware method improves 3d cad model reconstruction from images

VGGT-CAD: Reconstructing Parametric CAD 3D Model with Geometric Grounding

Abstract: Parametric CAD reconstruction requires recovering both precise geometry and editable modeling operations from visual observations, making it challenging under limited and ambiguous views. Existing methods mainly rely on 2D appearance cues and lack strong multi-view geometric priors. In this work, we present VGGT-CAD, a geometry-aware framework for parametric CAD reconstruction from single- and multi-view observations. We transfer pretrained 3D geometric priors into CAD reconstruction by encoding camera parameters as condition tokens and jointly modeling them with image tokens. To handle varying numbers of viewpoints, we introduce a variable-view cross-view context aggregation module that adaptively fuses multi-view features. We further develop a training-free geometry-aware view selection strategy to select complementary and reliable frames during inference. The resulting representation is decoded into CAD command sequences using a non-autoregressive decoder. We also develop VideoCAD, a large-scale multi-view video benchmark derived from existing CAD data through multi-view re-rendering. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of VGGT-CAD for visual CAD reconstruction under different observation configurations.

Fri 18 SeptComputer Vision and Pattern Recognition
The gist
Turning images or videos into editable 3D CAD models is hard because it requires understanding both detailed shapes and how those shapes were built. The authors created a new method called VGGT-CAD that uses geometric clues from multiple camera views to better recover 3D models and the steps to make them. Their system can choose the best camera angles to look at and combines features from these views to create accurate CAD instructions. They also built a new dataset with videos of CAD models to test and improve their method. Experiments show VGGT-CAD works well from single or multiple views.
Open → 2609.21225v1

Models capture individual differences in human preferences

Learning Heterogeneous Preferences

Abstract: Learning from human feedback has become a central paradigm for training modern AI systems, where models of human utility are used as reward models in policy learning. Existing methods typically assume a \emph{universal utility} function shared across a population and treat disagreement between annotators as stochastic variation. While suitable for objective tasks, this assumption breaks down in subjective domains where preferences vary systematically across individuals. We study the problem of subjective preference learning, in which observed choices arise from heterogeneous but internally consistent utility functions. Drawing upon rational choice theory, RCT \parencite{tversky1981framing}, we introduce \emph{individuated utility} functions conditioned on both the individual and their decision context, and propose a novel multi-stage architecture for estimating them from multi-modal data. We evaluate our framework on a newly collected dataset of more than $575{,}000$ pairwise aesthetic judgments from $2{,}398$ participants comparing automotive wheel designs. Our experiments show that individuated utility models substantially outperform universal utility models including foundation model baselines. Our results demonstrate that disagreement reflects meaningful preference heterogeneity rather than annotation noise. More broadly, our findings highlight the importance of collecting annotator attributes and learning individuated utility functions, enabling reward models that explicitly account for whose preferences they represent and faithfully capture human decision diversity.

Tue 15 SeptArtificial IntelligenceHuman-Computer InteractionMachine Learning
The gist
Many AI systems learn from people’s feedback by assuming everyone shares the same preferences. This works okay for objective tasks but not when people’s tastes differ a lot, like judging how something looks. The authors developed a new method that learns each person’s unique preferences based on who they are and the situation they face. They tested this on a large dataset of people’s choices about car wheel designs and showed their method predicts preferences much better than older models. This shows that disagreements between people often reflect real differences in taste, not just random noise.
Open → 2609.17847v1

Human AI cognition organized by task state and relational dimensions

The Dynamic Organization of Sustained Human-AI Cognition: From Construct-Level Change to Relational Structure

Abstract: As generative artificial intelligence becomes a routine participant in writing, learning, information retrieval, analysis, decision making, and problem solving, human-AI cognition research must address not only whether AI changes psychological constructs, use intensity, or task performance, but also how human cognitive activity is organized beneath similar aggregate indicators. This article proposes a dynamic cognitive organization framework that shifts analysis from construct-level change to relational organization anchored in the person's current task-cognitive state under sustained AI participation. The framework distinguishes five relational dimensions: execution locus, cognitive governance, representational reorganization, process organization, and reachable cognitive space; it also proposes a path-specific recursive principle whereby interaction outcomes, costs, and experiences may selectively reweight future probabilities of different organizational pathways. Five sets of testable propositions follow: the same overall AI-use intensity can correspond to different cognitive organizations; similar immediate outcomes can arise from different organizations with different predictive value for proximal subsequent outcomes; longitudinal organizational change need not track overall AI-use intensity; expansion of reachable cognitive space and displacement of pre-existing or emerging human-originated pathways may coexist within one episode; and recurrent cognitive organizations may redistribute cognitive practice opportunities, with accumulated differences potentially corresponding to different developmental trajectories in strategies, habits, and abilities. The contribution is an analytic level and five-dimensional relational structure for describing, comparing, measuring, and testing process differences that aggregate indicators or construct-level analyses do not uniquely determine.

Mon 14 SeptHuman-Computer Interaction
The gist
When people work with AI tools over time, their thinking doesn’t just change in simple ways like doing tasks faster or differently. Instead, the way their minds organize information and decisions shifts in complex patterns based on the task they're doing right now. The authors suggest looking at how thinking is organized in five key ways, such as who controls decisions and how ideas are arranged. They propose that understanding these patterns helps explain why similar results can come from very different mental processes when working with AI.
Open → 2609.14942v1

Physically stable 3D parts generated from a single image

SNAP3D: Physically Grounded 3D Parts for Assembly from a Single Image

Abstract: Part-aware 3D asset generation enables applications such as editing, articulation, simulation, and fabrication, yet existing methods can generate visually complete individual parts without ensuring that they form a valid physical assembly. Consequently, generated neighboring parts may interpenetrate, lack valid connections, or collapse under gravity. We propose a physics-guided framework for improving single-image part-aware 3D generation with physically compatible geometry and stable connections. Our method resolves inter-part penetration, recovers a contact graph between neighboring parts, and introduces parameterized connectors at their contact surfaces. Using feedback from physical simulation, we refine connector placement, orientation, and dimensions to improve assembly stability while preserving the generated geometry. We further introduce a physics-based evaluation protocol that complements conventional geometric metrics by directly testing assembly validity and stability under gravity. Experiments comparing against multiple part-aware 3D generators show substantial improvements in physical realizability and stability while maintaining geometric quality. We additionally validate the resulting parts through 3D printing and real-world assembly.

Fri 11 SeptGraphicsComputer Vision and Pattern Recognition
The gist
Creating 3D models made of multiple parts from a single image is tricky because parts may not fit together correctly or may fall apart. The authors designed a method that uses physics rules to fix overlapping parts, identify how parts touch, and add connectors that keep them stably attached. They use a physics simulation to adjust the connectors, ensuring the final 3D assembly can stand up to gravity and is physically realistic. Their method also includes tests to check if the assembled parts are stable, and they demonstrated that the parts can be 3D printed and put together in real life.
Open → 2609.13146v1

Guide suggests user preferences by smart questions during talks

GUIDE: Generative Utility Inference and Decision Engine

Abstract: Measuring the preferences of human users remains a fundamental challenge of AI alignment. Existing elicitation approaches struggle to efficiently discover multidimensional preferences or accurately ground these inferences in domain knowledge. To address this, we introduce GUIDE, an LLM-driven elicitation architecture that infers user preferences through conversations by combining Bayesian adaptive sampling for question selection and symbolic representation learning to initialize domain-specific preference models. GUIDE generalizes adaptive sampling to diverse elicitation questions through an extensible type system of transforms on a parameterized preference state. GUIDE produces domain-specific preference representations through an initialization process using symbolic rule-based learning to capture world knowledge and set priors over preference dimensions grounded in data about decision alternatives. The architecture provides observability and steerability to facilitate deployment and analyze elicitation processes. In silico experiments on investment portfolio optimization demonstrate that GUIDE improves cold-start and minimizes recommendation regret consistently within early elicitation interactions across user personas compared to prior work, LLM-only baselines, and ablated GUIDE versions.

Thu 10 SeptMachine Learning
The gist
People have many preferences that are hard for computers to understand, especially when these preferences involve many different factors. The authors created GUIDE, a computer system that chats with users and asks smart questions to quickly learn what they like. It uses both clever sampling methods to pick questions and rules about the world to better guess preferences. When they tested GUIDE on choosing investment portfolios, it made better recommendations early on compared to other methods. This helps computers make choices more closely matched to what users really want.
Open → 2609.12137v1

3D printing hinges that sense multiple movements without extra parts

X-Hinges: 3D Printing Self-Sensing Compliant Mechanisms for Continuous and Multi-DOF Motion Sensing

Abstract: We present X-Hinges, a design and fabrication method for self-sensing compliant mechanisms based on multi-material FDM 3D printing. By co-printing two conductive filaments of different conductivities within a compliant body, we embed resistive sensing elements directly during fabrication without post-assembly, enabling continuous motion sensing across multiple degrees of freedom in a single print. The structure supports three degrees of freedom, each equipped with a dedicated sensing element configuration for multi-DOF motion estimation. We develop a precision data acquisition system and data-driven regression models that enable continuous, real-time motion sensing. We also introduce an interactive design tool for customizing the geometry, mechanical properties, degrees of freedom, and sensing configurations of X-Hinges. The tool also supports augmenting existing 3D models with self-sensing structures, endowing ordinary objects with continuous multi-DOF sensing capabilities. Finally, we present a set of application examples demonstrating the capability of X-Hinges for fabricating personalized interactive interfaces.

Thu 10 SeptHuman-Computer Interaction
The gist
Devices often need sensors to know how they move, but these usually require extra parts and assembly. The authors created hinges that can be 3D printed with special materials to sense their own motion in several directions all at once. By mixing different conductive plastics during printing, their hinges measure movement continuously without adding sensors later. They also built tools to design and use these self-sensing hinges in various objects.
Open → 2609.11077v1

Human authorship depends on reflective shaping in generative ai creation

What Makes Creation Human? Authorship, Reasons, and Meaningful Human Control in Generative AI

Abstract: Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) significantly expands creators' productive capacity, but this does not necessarily entail a corresponding increase in creative agency or authorship. This paper distinguishes creativity at the level of the work from creative agency at the level of the creator, and argues that human authorship cannot be determined solely by manual intervention, degree of automation, the origin of an initial idea, or final selection authority. Rather, authorship depends on whether human judgment and reasons genuinely shape the development of the work. To articulate this requirement, the paper introduces Meaningful Human Control (MHC) into generative creation and identifies a limitation of its classical tracking condition. Creative reasons are not always fully specified prior to interaction with AI; they may emerge, change, or be abandoned as the creative process unfolds. The paper therefore proposes dynamic-reflexive tracking (DRT), which requires that a creator's evolving reasons undergo reflective uptake, exert genuine influence on the subsequent trajectory of creation, and remain capable of rejecting and redirecting the system's default direction. DRT consists of four conditions: diachronic reason formation, reflective uptake, trajectory efficacy, and contestability and redirection, together with a minimal tracing requirement. The paper argues that human authorship under generative AI depends not on how many steps a person personally performs, but on whether that person's reasons continuously, reflectively, and effectively shape what the work becomes.

Wed 9 SeptHuman-Computer InteractionComputers and Society
The gist
Generative AI can help produce creative works, but this doesn't mean the person using the AI is truly the author. The paper explains that authorship depends on whether a person's judgments and reasons actively and thoughtfully shape the creative process as it happens. It introduces a new idea called dynamic-reflexive tracking that ensures humans can guide, change, or stop the AI’s work based on their evolving intentions. This approach shows that authorship is about continuous, meaningful control, not just how much a person hands-on operates the AI.
Open → 2609.10738v1

AI assistant functions influence trust differently based on user knowledge

How Far Do Capability Cues Travel? Anthropomorphism and Differentiated Trust in a Platform-Embedded AI Assistant

Abstract: Visible AI capabilities need not translate into broader judgments of trustworthiness. In a randomized 2 x 2 experiment with 270 U.S.-based Reddit users, an embedded assistant displayed one or three functions, with or without a brief rationale. Displaying three functions increased perceived multifunctionality; no other randomized main effect survived correction across the six outcomes. Rationale availability did not reliably increase perceived intelligence. Exploratory analysis indicated stronger uptake of the functional display at higher objective AI literacy. Among concurrently measured judgments, perceived multifunctionality was associated with perceived intelligence, which was associated with anthropomorphism and all three trust dimensions. After accounting for perceived intelligence, anthropomorphism was positively associated with benevolence, but not reliably with integrity or ability. These findings separate interface effects from relationships among users' perceptions and show why ability, integrity, and benevolence should be evaluated separately.

Wed 9 SeptHuman-Computer Interaction
The gist
People don't always trust AI assistants just because they see the AI can do more things. The authors showed that when an assistant displayed three functions instead of one, users perceived it as more multifunctional, but this didn't always increase trust in intelligence. Giving explanations for the functions didn't make users think the AI was smarter. People who knew more about AI responded more strongly to seeing more functions. How users view the AI’s intelligence, anthropomorphism (seeing it as human-like), and trust factors like benevolence, integrity, and ability are related but different.
Open → 2609.09713v1

Multi-source feedback integration boosts design confidence and flexibility

Integrating Multi-Source Feedback in Computational Design

Abstract: In real-world design practice, evaluations rarely rely on a single source of judgment. Designers routinely combine expert opinions, empirical studies, and computational models, each with distinct strengths and limitations. While machine learning offers methods to integrate multiple feedback sources, these approaches remain largely inaccessible to designers without technical expertise. In this paper, we explore how to integrate multiple feedback sources, primarily through: (1) a practical approach for multi-source integration, and (2) its implementation in MUSE, a no-code tool that allows designers to combine and balance diverse sources. Our technical findings show that independent modeling of multiple evaluation sources enables exploration across heterogeneous feedback, accommodates different evaluation speeds, surfaces disagreements between sources, and supports an adaptable evaluation setup that designers can reconfigure during their process. In a visualization design study, participants navigated their own judgments alongside simulator feedback, reporting a perception of enhanced confidence and flexibility. Our results highlight the viability of multi-source integration to support computational design, offering a step toward bridging the gap between advanced optimization methods and design practice.

Tue 8 SeptHuman-Computer Interaction
The gist
Designers often get feedback from many places like experts, experiments, and computer models, but it’s hard to combine all that information easily. The authors show a way to bring together different types of feedback in one tool called MUSE that doesn’t need coding skills. This tool helps designers see when feedback disagrees, lets them adjust how much they trust each source, and use feedback at different speeds. People using MUSE felt more sure about their designs and could work more flexibly. This method helps connect advanced computer analysis with how designers actually work.
Open → 2609.09483v1