Graphionale: How Graph Visualizations of LLM Rationales Affect Human Decision Making
Xinru WangZhexuan MaMing YinShuai MaThomas W Malone
Aug 2026
Human-computer Interaction
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly equipped with augmented reasoning capabilities to generate rationales that support human decision-making. Yet these text-dense rationales often impose substantial cognitive burdens. Building on a formative co-design study that identified user preferences for non-linear reasoning representations, we developed Graphionale as a testbed for empirically studying argument-map-style rationale visualization. This system transforms linear LLM rationales into interactive, multi-level graphs. It explicitly structures logical relationships (e.g., conclusions, premises, support, and objections), while further extracting entities and relations within each statement to construct condensed node-link representations. We conduct a large-scale online user study (N = 204) to examine when graphical rationales are more effective than textual ones, across varying task modality (verbal vs. visual reasoning), rationale format (textual vs. graphical), and question difficulty (easy vs. hard). Our results show that graphical rationales do not help uniformly: they improve trust calibration for verbal reasoning yet feel more cognitively demanding and less satisfying; for visual reasoning, they impair calibration yet feel more engaging and helpful. In each modality, the format that better supports calibrated decisions is not the one users prefer, highlighting that matching rationale format to task modality is key to effective AI explanation design. Our findings contribute empirical design knowledge about when and how graphical rationales support human decision making, and inform the next-generation reasoning-aware AI interfaces.
Investigating how experienced developers use agents in building software, including their motivations, strategies, task suitability, and sentiments finds that while experienced developers value agents as a productivity boost, they retain their agency in software design and implementation out of insistence on fundamental software quality attributes.
The integration of AI into qualitative design research presents a fundamental tension: how do we leverage AI while preserving the subjective, intuitive judgments that define design expertise? This paper examines this question through a case study of analyzing 20 user responses about video conferencing platforms for educational contexts. We argue that AI sensemaking tools risk flattening the rich data patterns, amplifying contradictory textures of user feedback into sterile categories thereby transforming design research from an interpretive craft into a mechanical sorting exercise (rigid and formal). Through comparative analysis of AI-assisted sensemaking versus human-centered approaches to the same dataset, we identify when algorithmic efficiency enhances understanding and when it diminishes the designer's interpretive agency (uncovering hidden needs, critical enquiry, what if enquiries, making decisions, having trade-offs). We present a framework for augmented sensemaking that positions AI as an instrument for amplifying human judgment rather than replacing it. Our findings suggest that the most valuable role for AI in design research is not to eliminate subjectivity, but to make it more intentional, reflective, and accountable.
Existing articulatory corpora based on real-time MRI and electromagnetic articulography capture tongue motion but lack traceable labels for the muscle-driven process underlying each configuration. We introduce a simulator-grounded construction framework, instantiated as 3DTongueQA. Controlled 11-D muscle activations are mapped by the ArtiSynth Badin finite-element model to fixed-topology tongue meshes, converted into reusable biomechanical records, and rendered as deterministic QA on simulator-defined muscle state, geometry, and target-directed change. From 295,157 screened configurations, 295,115 valid meshes yield 891,156 QA records per language. English and Korean naturalizations modify only surface form and are verified against the source records. A swappable SpiralNet++--Qwen3-8B baseline reaches $62.9\pm9.2$ Muscle EM, dropping to 2.2 under mesh shuffling; anchor-held-out training retains 80.4--98.6\% of full-inventory scores, while task-specific readouts reach $88.7\pm0.7$ Muscle EM and $93.3\pm1.0$ Direction EM. The results show geometry-grounded supervision supporting both unified language QA and structured prediction. Code is available at https://github.com/esh0504/muscle-grounded-qa .
Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) broaden access to authentic scientific inquiry through responsive instructor support as research problems become increasingly complex. Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) may extend this support by providing individualized assistance that can adapt as student needs change. However, how embedding GenAI within a CURE to provide support across the research process impacts student inquiry, collaboration, and scientific reasoning remains unresolved. Here we use longitudinal qualitative data collected across three semesters of a bioinformatics and genomics CURE to show that GenAI expanded the intellectual reach of the research experience in three distinct ways. First, personalized, on-demand scaffolding allowed students to move beyond the boundaries of instructor expertise and transform their own interests into researchable inquiry, with all teams developing distinct self-directed projects rather than selecting instructor-provided topics. Second, GenAI became part of the distributed cognitive system of research teams, helping novice researchers communicate and coordinate across differentiated expertise without eliminating specialization. Third, expanded capability did not replace the need for disciplinary judgment. Students increasingly validated, revised, or rejected AI-generated contributions, such that research independence emerged through retained intellectual responsibility. Together, these findings suggest that GenAI can extend the reach of CUREs by expanding what novice researchers can investigate, how they can collaborate, and the level of responsibility they can assume while preserving human judgment central to authentic scientific inquiry.
Aditi Babar, Kristin J. Davin, Alex Dornburg· 0 citations
LLM-powered agents struggle with personalization when users issue raw, underspecified queries. In this setting, agents must infer latent intent, extract preferences from noisy interaction histories, and select among competing alternatives. Existing benchmarks rarely test this capability, as they often rely on user-refined queries or simplified histories. We introduce personalized product search (PPS), a testbed for agentic personalization under raw queries and diverse histories. We construct Agent Personalized Benchmark (APeB) from action logs, pairing underspecified intents with rich histories and user-viewed candidate items. Evaluating state-of-the-art LLMs with multi-step agent workflows, we find that models handle explicit queries well but struggle with early-stage queries requiring intent and preference discovery. Rubric analysis attributes this gap mainly to ineffective history use. A simple history-aware query-refinement pipeline, VQRA, yields consistent gains, highlighting the need for dedicated history-utilization modules in personalized agents.
Garry Yang, Zizhe Chen, Xinru Chen et al.· 0 citations
This paper argues that the dominant anthropomorphism frame operates from a position of institutional advantage rather than earned epistemic authority: collapsing the variety of academic perspectives into a single outbound position of user error, imposed without establishing the grounds required to justify it and without accounting for the harms it produces.
Known for his clear and elegant writing style, Bertsekas shaped fields from control and optimization to large-scale computation and artificial intelligence.
