SurgWound-Bench: A Benchmark for Surgical Wound Diagnosis

Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common and costly healthcare-associated infections and and surgical wound care remains a significant clinical challenge in preventing SSIs and improving patient outcomes. While recent studies have explored the use of deep learning for preliminary surgical wound screening, progress has been hindered by concerns over data privacy and the high costs associated with expert annotation. Currently, no publicly available dataset or benchmark encompasses various types of surgical wounds, resulting in the absence of an open-source Surgical-Wound screening tool. To address this gap: (1) we present SurgWound, the first open-source dataset featuring a diverse array of surgical wound types. It contains 697 surgical wound images annotated by 3 professional surgeons with eight fine-grained clinical attributes. (2) Based on SurgWound, we introduce the first benchmark for surgical wound diagnosis, which includes visual question answering (VQA) and report generation tasks to comprehensively evaluate model performance. (3) Furthermore, we propose a three-stage learning framework, WoundQwen, for surgical wound diagnosis. In the first stage, we employ five independent MLLMs to accurately predict specific surgical wound characteristics. In the second stage, these predictions serve as additional knowledge inputs to two MLLMs responsible for diagnosing outcomes, which assess infection risk and guide subsequent interventions. In the third stage, we train a MLLM that integrates the diagnostic results from the previous two stages to produce a comprehensive report. This three-stage framework can analyze detailed surgical wound characteristics and provide subsequent instructions to patients based on surgical images, paving the way for personalized wound care, timely intervention, and improved patient outcomes.

Multi-Agent-as-Judge: Aligning LLM-Agent-Based Automated Evaluation with Multi-Dimensional Human Evaluation

Nearly all human work is collaborative; thus, the evaluation of real-world NLP applications often requires multiple dimensions that align with diverse human perspectives. As real human evaluator resources are often scarce and costly, the emerging "LLM-as-a-judge" paradigm sheds light on a promising approach to leverage LLM agents to believably simulate human evaluators. Yet, to date, existing LLM-as-a-judge approaches face two limitations: persona descriptions of agents are often arbitrarily designed, and the frameworks are not generalizable to other tasks. To address these challenges, we propose MAJ-EVAL, a Multi-Agent-as-Judge evaluation framework that can automatically construct multiple evaluator personas with distinct dimensions from relevant text documents (e.g., research papers), instantiate LLM agents with the personas, and engage in-group debates with multi-agents to Generate multi-dimensional feedback. Our evaluation experiments in both the educational and medical domains demonstrate that MAJ-EVAL can generate evaluation results that better align with human experts' ratings compared with conventional automated evaluation metrics and existing LLM-as-a-judge methods.

Shop-R1: Rewarding LLMs to Simulate Human Behavior in Online Shopping via Reinforcement Learning

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated strong potential in generating 'believable human-like' behavior in web environments. Prior work has explored augmenting training data with LLM-synthesized rationales and applying supervised fine-tuning (SFT) to enhance reasoning ability, which in turn can improve downstream action prediction. However, the performance of such approaches remains inherently bounded by the reasoning capabilities of the model used to generate the rationales. In this paper, we introduce Shop-R1, a novel reinforcement learning (RL) framework aimed at enhancing the reasoning ability of LLMs for simulation of real human behavior in online shopping environments Specifically, Shop-R1 decomposes the human behavior simulation task into two stages: rationale generation and action prediction, each guided by distinct reward signals. For rationale generation, we leverage internal model signals (e.g., logit distributions) to guide the reasoning process in a self-supervised manner. For action prediction, we propose a hierarchical reward structure with difficulty-aware scaling to prevent reward hacking and enable fine-grained reward assignment. This design evaluates both high-level action types and the correctness of fine-grained sub-action details (attributes and values), rewarding outputs proportionally to their difficulty. Experimental results show that our method achieves a relative improvement of over 65% compared to the baseline.

OPeRA: A Dataset of Observation, Persona, Rationale, and Action for Evaluating LLMs on Human Online Shopping Behavior Simulation

Can large language models (LLMs) accurately simulate the next web action of a specific user? While LLMs have shown promising capabilities in generating ``believable'' human behaviors, evaluating their ability to mimic real user behaviors remains an open challenge, largely due to the lack of high-quality, publicly available datasets that capture both the observable actions and the internal reasoning of an actual human user. To address this gap, we introduce OPERA, a novel dataset of Observation, Persona, Rationale, and Action collected from real human participants during online shopping sessions. OPERA is the first public dataset that comprehensively captures: user personas, browser observations, fine-grained web actions, and self-reported just-in-time rationales. We developed both an online questionnaire and a custom browser plugin to gather this dataset with high fidelity. Using OPERA, we establish the first benchmark to evaluate how well current LLMs can predict a specific user's next action and rationale with a given persona and <observation, action, rationale> history. This dataset lays the groundwork for future research into LLM agents that aim to act as personalized digital twins for human.

AgentA/B: Automated and Scalable Web A/BTesting with Interactive LLM Agents

A/B testing experiment is a widely adopted method for evaluating UI/UX design decisions in modern web applications. Yet, traditional A/B testing remains constrained by its dependence on the large-scale and live traffic of human participants, and the long time of waiting for the testing result. Through formative interviews with six experienced industry practitioners, we identified critical bottlenecks in current A/B testing workflows. In response, we present AgentA/B, a novel system that leverages Large Language Model-based autonomous agents (LLM Agents) to automatically simulate user interaction behaviors with real webpages. AgentA/B enables scalable deployment of LLM agents with diverse personas, each capable of navigating the dynamic webpage and interactively executing multi-step interactions like search, clicking, filtering, and purchasing. In a demonstrative controlled experiment, we employ AgentA/B to simulate a between-subject A/B testing with 1,000 LLM agents Amazon.com, and compare agent behaviors with real human shopping behaviors at a scale. Our findings suggest AgentA/B can emulate human-like behavior patterns.

UXAgent: A System for Simulating Usability Testing of Web Design with LLM Agents

Usability testing is a fundamental research method that user experience (UX) researchers use to evaluate and iterate a web design, but\textbf{ how to evaluate and iterate the usability testing study design } itself? Recent advances in Large Language Model-simulated Agent (\textbf{LLM Agent}) research inspired us to design \textbf{UXAgent} to support UX researchers in evaluating and reiterating their usability testing study design before they conduct the real human-subject study. Our system features a Persona Generator module, an LLM Agent module, and a Universal Browser Connector module to automatically generate thousands of simulated users to interactively test the target website. The system also provides an Agent Interview Interface and a Video Replay Interface so that the UX researchers can easily review and analyze the generated qualitative and quantitative log data. Through a heuristic evaluation, five UX researcher participants praised the innovation of our system but also expressed concerns about the future of LLM Agent usage in UX studies.

Beyond Believability: Accurate Human Behavior Simulation with Fine-Tuned LLMs

Recent research shows that LLMs can simulate ``believable'' human behaviors to power LLM agents via prompt-only methods. In this work, we focus on evaluating and improving LLM's objective ``accuracy'' rather than the subjective ``believability'' in the web action generation task, leveraging a large-scale, real-world dataset collected from online shopping human actions. We present the first comprehensive quantitative evaluation of state-of-the-art LLMs (e.g., DeepSeek-R1, Llama, and Claude) on the task of web action generation. Our results show that fine-tuning LLMs on real-world behavioral data substantially improves their ability to generate actions compared to prompt-only methods. Furthermore, incorporating synthesized reasoning traces into model training leads to additional performance gains, demonstrating the value of explicit rationale in behavior modeling. This work establishes a new benchmark for evaluating LLMs in behavior simulation and offers actionable insights into how real-world action data and reasoning augmentation can enhance the fidelity of LLM agents.

Towards a Design Guideline for RPA Evaluation: A Survey of Large Language Model-Based Role-Playing Agents

Role-Playing Agent (RPA) is an increasingly popular type of LLM Agent that simulates human-like behaviors in a variety of tasks. However, evaluating RPAs is challenging due to diverse task requirements and agent designs. This paper proposes an evidence-based, actionable, and generalizable evaluation design guideline for LLM-based RPA by systematically reviewing 1,676 papers published between Jan. 2021 and Dec. 2024. Our analysis identifies six agent attributes, seven task attributes, and seven evaluation metrics from existing literature. Based on these findings, we present an RPA evaluation design guideline to help researchers develop more systematic and consistent evaluation methods.

UXAgent: An LLM Agent-Based Usability Testing Framework for Web Design

Usability testing is a fundamental yet challenging (e.g., inflexible to iterate the study design flaws and hard to recruit study participants) research method for user experience (UX) researchers to evaluate a web design. Recent advances in Large Language Model-simulated Agent (LLM-Agent) research inspired us to design UXAgent to support UX researchers in evaluating and reiterating their usability testing study design before they conduct the real human subject study. Our system features an LLM-Agent module and a universal browser connector module so that UX researchers can automatically generate thousands of simulated users to test the target website. The results are shown in qualitative (e.g., interviewing how an agent thinks ), quantitative (e.g., # of actions), and video recording formats for UX researchers to analyze. Through a heuristic user evaluation with five UX researchers, participants praised the innovation of our system but also expressed concerns about the future of LLM Agent-assisted UX study.

Toward Metaphor-Fluid Conversation Design for Voice User Interfaces

Metaphors play a critical role in shaping user experiences with Voice User Interfaces (VUIs), yet existing designs often rely on static, human-centric metaphors that fail to adapt to diverse contexts and user needs. This paper introduces Metaphor-Fluid Design, a novel approach that dynamically adjusts metaphorical representations based on conversational use-contexts. We compare this approach to a Default VUI, which characterizes the present implementation of commercial VUIs commonly designed around the persona of an assistant, offering a uniform interaction style across contexts. In Study 1 (N=130), metaphors were mapped to four key use-contexts-commands, information seeking, sociality, and error recovery-along the dimensions of formality and hierarchy, revealing distinct preferences for task-specific metaphorical designs. Study 2 (N=91) evaluates a Metaphor-Fluid VUI against a Default VUI, showing that the Metaphor-Fluid VUI enhances perceived intention to adopt, enjoyment, and likability by aligning better with user expectations for different contexts. However, individual differences in metaphor preferences highlight the need for personalization. These findings challenge the one-size-fits-all paradigm of VUI design and demonstrate the potential of Metaphor-Fluid Design to create more adaptive and engaging human-AI interactions.