Watermarking Game-Playing Agents in Perfect-Information Extensive-Form Games

Watermarking techniques for large language models (LLMs), which encode hidden information in the output so its source can be verified, have gained significant attention in recent days, thanks to their potential capability to detect accidental or deliberate misuse. Similar challenges involving model misuse also exist in the context of game-playing, such as when detecting the unauthorized use of AI tools in gaming platforms (e.g., cheating in online chess). In this paper, we initiate the study of how game-playing strategies can be watermarked. We show how the KGW watermark for LLMs can be adapted to watermark game-playing agents in perfect-information extensive-form games. The watermark can then be detected using a statistical test. We show that the degradation in the quality of the watermarked strategy profile, quantified by the expected utility, can be bounded, but there is a tradeoff between detectability and quality. In our experiments, we bootstrap the watermarking framework to various chess engines and demonstrate that a) the impact of the watermark on the quality of the strategy is negligible and b) the watermark can be detected with just a handful of games.

Parallelizing Counterfactual Regret Minimization

Parallelization has played an instrumental role in the field of artificial intelligence (AI), drastically reducing the time taken to train and evaluate large AI models. In contrast to its impact in the broader field of AI, applying parallelization to computational game solving is relatively unexplored, despite its great potential. In this paper, we parallelize the family of counterfactual regret minimization (CFR) algorithms, which were central to important breakthroughs for solving large imperfect-information games. We present a generalized parallelization framework, reframing CFR as a series of linear algebra operations. Then, existing techniques for parallelizing linear algebra operations can be applied to accelerate CFR. We also describe how our technique can be applied to other tabular members of the CFR family of algorithms, including the state-of-the-art, such as CFR+, discounted CFR, and predictive variants of CFR. Experimentally, we show that our CFR implementation on a GPU is up to four orders of magnitude faster than Google DeepMind OpenSpiel's CFR implementations on a CPU.

Heuristic Pathologies and Further Variance Reduction via Uncertainty Propagation in the AIVAT Family of Techniques

How should an agent's performance in a multiagent environment be evaluated when there is a limited sample size or a high cost of running a trial? The AIVAT family of variance reduction techniques was proposed to address this challenge by introducing unbiased low-variance estimators of agents' expected payoffs. An important component of AIVAT is a heuristic value function that discriminates between potentially low- and high-value counterfactual histories. A notable gap in the literature is that there is little to no constraint or guideline on how the heuristic value function should be chosen or how uncertainty in its output should be handled. In our first contribution, we parameterize the heuristic value function to highlight AIVAT's potential vulnerabilities: a) the sample variance can be set pathologically low by directly applying gradient descent on the sample variance, and b) one can p-hack to draw a desired statistical conclusion via gradient descent/ascent on the test statistic. The main takeaway is that the heuristic value function should be fixed prior to observing the evaluation data! In our second contribution, we show how the heuristic uncertainty can be propagated to quantify the uncertainty of AIVAT estimates. It is then possible to further reduce the variance using inverse-variance weighted averaging, but AIVAT's unbiasedness guarantee may have to be sacrificed. In our experiments, we use a dataset of 10,000 poker hands to demonstrate our heuristic pathology and uncertainty results, with the latter yielding a 43.0% reduction in the number of samples (poker hands) needed to draw statistical conclusions.

GUIDE: A Benchmark for Understanding and Assisting Users in Open-Ended GUI Tasks

Graphical User Interface (GUI) agents have the potential to assist users in interacting with complex software (e.g., PowerPoint, Photoshop). While prior research has primarily focused on automating user actions through clicks and keystrokes, this paradigm overlooks human intention, where users value the ability to explore, iterate, and refine their ideas while maintaining agency. To move beyond automation and toward collaboration, GUI agents must understand what users are doing and why. We introduce GUIDE (GUI User Intent Detection Evaluation), a benchmark that evaluates AI models on their ability to perceive user behavior, infer intent, and provide assistance in open-ended GUI tasks. GUIDE consists of 67.5 hours of screen recordings from 120 novice user demonstrations with think-aloud narrations, across 10 software. GUIDE defines three tasks - (i) Behavior State Detection, (ii) Intent Prediction, and (iii) Help Prediction that test a model's ability to recognize behavior state, reason about goals, and decide when and how to help. Evaluations across eight state-of-the-art multimodal models reveal that all models struggled, achieving only 44.6% and 55.0% accuracy on behavior state and help prediction. However, providing user context significantly improved the performance, raising help prediction by up to 50.2pp, highlighting the critical role of structured user understanding in effective assistance. Our dataset is available at https://guide-bench.github.io.

"When to Hand Off, When to Work Together": Expanding Human-Agent Co-Creative Collaboration through Concurrent Interaction

Human collaborators coordinate dynamically through process visibility and workspace awareness, yet AI agents typically either provide only final outputs or expose read-only execution processes (e.g., planning, reasoning) without interpreting concurrent user actions on shared artifacts. Building on mixed-initiative interaction principles, we explore whether agents can achieve collaborative context awareness -- interpreting concurrent user actions on shared artifacts and adapting in real-time. Study 1 (N=10 professional designers) revealed that process visibility enabled reasoning about agent actions but exposed conflicts when agents could not distinguish feedback from independent work. We developed CLEO, which interprets collaborative intent and adapts in real-time. Study 2 (N=10, two-day with stimulated recall interviews) analyzed 214 turns, identifying five action patterns, six triggers, and four enabling factors explaining when designers choose delegation (70.1%), direction (28.5%), or concurrent work (31.8%). We present a decision model with six interaction loops, design implications, and an annotated dataset.

DiscoverLLM: From Executing Intents to Discovering Them

To handle ambiguous and open-ended requests, Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly trained to interact with users to surface intents they have not yet expressed (e.g., ask clarification questions). However, users are often ambiguous because they have not yet formed their intents: they must observe and explore outcomes to discover what they want. Simply asking "what kind of tone do you want?" fails when users themselves do not know. We introduce DiscoverLLM, a novel and generalizable framework that trains LLMs to help users form and discover their intents. Central to our approach is a novel user simulator that models cognitive state with a hierarchy of intents that progressively concretize as the model surfaces relevant options -- where the degree of concretization serves as a reward signal that models can be trained to optimize. Resulting models learn to collaborate with users by adaptively diverging (i.e., explore options) when intents are unclear, and converging (i.e., refine and implement) when intents concretize. Across proposed interactive benchmarks in creative writing, technical writing, and SVG drawing, DiscoverLLM achieves over 10% higher task performance while reducing conversation length by up to 40%. In a user study with 75 human participants, DiscoverLLM improved conversation satisfaction and efficiency compared to baselines.

ClearFairy: Capturing Creative Workflows through Decision Structuring, In-Situ Questioning, and Rationale Inference

Capturing professionals' decision-making in creative workflows is essential for reflection, collaboration, and knowledge sharing, yet existing methods often leave rationales incomplete and implicit decisions hidden. To address this, we present CLEAR framework that structures reasoning into cognitive decision steps-linked units of actions, artifacts, and self-explanations that make decisions traceable. Building on this framework, we introduce ClearFairy, a think-aloud AI assistant for UI design that detects weak explanations, asks lightweight clarifying questions, and infers missing rationales to ease the knowledge-sharing burden. In a study with twelve creative professionals, 85% of ClearFairy's inferred rationales were accepted, increasing strong explanations from 14% to over 83% of decision steps without adding cognitive demand. The captured steps also enhanced generative AI agents in Figma, yielding next-action predictions better aligned with professionals and producing more coherent design outcomes. For future research on human knowledge-grounded creative AI agents, we release a dataset of captured 417 decision steps.

Evaluations at Work: Measuring the Capabilities of GenAI in Use

Current AI benchmarks miss the messy, multi-turn nature of human-AI collaboration. We present an evaluation framework that decomposes real-world tasks into interdependent subtasks, letting us track both LLM performance and users' strategies across a dialogue. Complementing this framework, we develop a suite of metrics, including a composite usage derived from semantic similarity, word overlap, and numerical matches; structural coherence; intra-turn diversity; and a novel measure of the "information frontier" reflecting the alignment between AI outputs and users' working knowledge. We demonstrate our methodology in a financial valuation task that mirrors real-world complexity. Our empirical findings reveal that while greater integration of LLM-generated content generally enhances output quality, its benefits are moderated by factors such as response incoherence, excessive subtask diversity, and the distance of provided information from users' existing knowledge. These results suggest that proactive dialogue strategies designed to inject novelty may inadvertently undermine task performance. Our work thus advances a more holistic evaluation of human-AI collaboration, offering both a robust methodological framework and actionable insights for developing more effective AI-augmented work processes.

VideoMix: Aggregating How-To Videos for Task-Oriented Learning

Tutorial videos are a valuable resource for people looking to learn new tasks. People often learn these skills by viewing multiple tutorial videos to get an overall understanding of a task by looking at different approaches to achieve the task. However, navigating through multiple videos can be time-consuming and mentally demanding as these videos are scattered and not easy to skim. We propose VideoMix, a system that helps users gain a holistic understanding of a how-to task by aggregating information from multiple videos on the task. Insights from our formative study (N=12) reveal that learners value understanding potential outcomes, required materials, alternative methods, and important details shared by different videos. Powered by a Vision-Language Model pipeline, VideoMix extracts and organizes this information, presenting concise textual summaries alongside relevant video clips, enabling users to quickly digest and navigate the content. A comparative user study (N=12) demonstrated that VideoMix enabled participants to gain a more comprehensive understanding of tasks with greater efficiency than a baseline video interface, where videos are viewed independently. Our findings highlight the potential of a task-oriented, multi-video approach where videos are organized around a shared goal, offering an enhanced alternative to conventional video-based learning.

Iffy-Or-Not: Extending the Web to Support the Critical Evaluation of Fallacious Texts

Social platforms have expanded opportunities for deliberation with the comments being used to inform one's opinion. However, using such information to form opinions is challenged by unsubstantiated or false content. To enhance the quality of opinion formation and potentially confer resistance to misinformation, we developed Iffy-Or-Not (ION), a browser extension that seeks to invoke critical thinking when reading texts. With three features guided by argumentation theory, ION highlights fallacious content, suggests diverse queries to probe them with, and offers deeper questions to consider and chat with others about. From a user study (N=18), we found that ION encourages users to be more attentive to the content, suggests queries that align with or are preferable to their own, and poses thought-provoking questions that expands their perspectives. However, some participants expressed aversion to ION due to misalignments with their information goals and thinking predispositions. Potential backfiring effects with ION are discussed.