Key Considerations for Domain Expert Involvement in LLM Design and Evaluation: An Ethnographic Study

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly developed for use in complex professional domains, yet little is known about how teams design and evaluate these systems in practice. This paper examines the challenges and trade-offs in LLM development through a 12-week ethnographic study of a team building a pedagogical chatbot. The researcher observed design and evaluation activities and conducted interviews with both developers and domain experts. Analysis revealed four key practices: creating workarounds for data collection, turning to augmentation when expert input was limited, co-developing evaluation criteria with experts, and adopting hybrid expert-developer-LLM evaluation strategies. These practices show how teams made strategic decisions under constraints and demonstrate the central role of domain expertise in shaping the system. Challenges included expert motivation and trust, difficulties structuring participatory design, and questions around ownership and integration of expert knowledge. We propose design opportunities for future LLM development workflows that emphasize AI literacy, transparent consent, and frameworks recognizing evolving expert roles.

SPILLage: Agentic Oversharing on the Web

LLM-powered agents are beginning to automate user's tasks across the open web, often with access to user resources such as emails and calendars. Unlike standard LLMs answering questions in a controlled ChatBot setting, web agents act "in the wild", interacting with third parties and leaving behind an action trace. Therefore, we ask the question: how do web agents handle user resources when accomplishing tasks on their behalf across live websites? In this paper, we formalize Natural Agentic Oversharing -- the unintentional disclosure of task-irrelevant user information through an agent trace of actions on the web. We introduce SPILLage, a framework that characterizes oversharing along two dimensions: channel (content vs. behavior) and directness (explicit vs. implicit). This taxonomy reveals a critical blind spot: while prior work focuses on text leakage, web agents also overshare behaviorally through clicks, scrolls, and navigation patterns that can be monitored. We benchmark 180 tasks on live e-commerce sites with ground-truth annotations separating task-relevant from task-irrelevant attributes. Across 1,080 runs spanning two agentic frameworks and three backbone LLMs, we demonstrate that oversharing is pervasive with behavioral oversharing dominates content oversharing by 5x. This effect persists -- and can even worsen -- under prompt-level mitigation. However, removing task-irrelevant information before execution improves task success by up to 17.9%, demonstrating that reducing oversharing improves task success. Our findings underscore that protecting privacy in web agents is a fundamental challenge, requiring a broader view of "output" that accounts for what agents do on the web, not just what they type. Our datasets and code are available at https://github.com/jrohsc/SPILLage.

RGAlign-Rec: Ranking-Guided Alignment for Latent Query Reasoning in Recommendation Systems

Proactive intent prediction is a critical capability in modern e-commerce chatbots, enabling "zero-query" recommendations by anticipating user needs from behavioral and contextual signals. However, existing industrial systems face two fundamental challenges: (1) the semantic gap between discrete user features and the semantic intents within the chatbot's Knowledge Base, and (2) the objective misalignment between general-purpose LLM outputs and task-specific ranking utilities. To address these issues, we propose RGAlign-Rec, a closed-loop alignment framework that integrates an LLM-based semantic reasoner with a Query-Enhanced (QE) ranking model. We also introduce Ranking-Guided Alignment (RGA), a multi-stage training paradigm that utilizes downstream ranking signals as feedback to refine the LLM's latent reasoning. Extensive experiments on a large-scale industrial dataset from Shopee demonstrate that RGAlign-Rec achieves a 0.12% gain in GAUC, leading to a significant 3.52% relative reduction in error rate, and a 0.56% improvement in Recall@3. Online A/B testing further validates the cumulative effectiveness of our framework: the Query-Enhanced model (QE-Rec) initially yields a 0.98% improvement in CTR, while the subsequent Ranking-Guided Alignment stage contributes an additional 0.13% gain. These results indicate that ranking-aware alignment effectively synchronizes semantic reasoning with ranking objectives, significantly enhancing both prediction accuracy and service quality in real-world proactive recommendation systems.

"Not Human, Funnier": How Machine Identity Shapes Humor Perception in Online AI Stand-up Comedy

Chatbots are increasingly applied to domains previously reserved for human actors. One such domain is comedy, whereby both the general public working with ChatGPT and research-based LLM-systems have tried their hands on making humor. In formative interviews with professional comedians and video analyses of stand-up comedy in humans, we found that human performers often use their ethnic, gender, community, and demographic-based identity to enable joke-making. This suggests whether the identity of AI itself can empower AI humor generation for human audiences. We designed a machine-identity-based agent that uses its own status as AI to tell jokes in online performance format. Studies with human audiences (N=32) showed that machine-identity-based agents were seen as funnier than baseline-GPT agent. This work suggests the design of human-AI integrated systems that explicitly utilize AI as its own unique identity apart from humans.

SCOPE: Selective Conformal Optimized Pairwise LLM Judging

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as judges to replace costly human preference labels in pairwise evaluation. Despite their practicality, LLM judges remain prone to miscalibration and systematic biases. This paper proposes SCOPE (Selective Conformal Optimized Pairwise Evaluation), a framework for selective pairwise judging with finite-sample statistical guarantees. Under exchangeability, SCOPE calibrates an acceptance threshold such that the error rate among non-abstained judgments is at most a user-specified level $α$. To provide SCOPE with a bias-neutral uncertainty signal, we introduce Bidirectional Preference Entropy (BPE), which queries the judge under both response positions, aggregates the implied preference probabilities to enforce invariance to response order, and converts the aggregated probability into an entropy-based uncertainty score. Across MT-Bench, RewardBench, and Chatbot Arena, BPE improves uncertainty quality over standard confidence proxies, providing a stronger selection signal that enables SCOPE to consistently meet the target risk level while retaining good coverage across judge scales. In particular, at $α= 0.10$, \textsc{Scope} consistently satisfies the risk bound across all benchmarks and judge scales (empirical risk $\approx 0.097$ to $0.099$), while retaining substantial coverage, reaching $0.89$ on RewardBench with Qwen-14B and $0.98$ on RewardBench with Qwen-32B. Compared to naïve baselines, \textsc{Scope} accepts up to $2.4\times$ more judgments on MT-Bench with Qwen-7B under the same target risk constraint, demonstrating that BPE enables reliable and high-coverage LLM-based evaluation.

Differentiable Modal Logic for Multi-Agent Diagnosis, Orchestration and Communication

As multi-agent AI systems evolve from simple chatbots to autonomous swarms, debugging semantic failures requires reasoning about knowledge, belief, causality, and obligation, precisely what modal logic was designed to formalize. However, traditional modal logic requires manual specification of relationship structures that are unknown or dynamic in real systems. This tutorial demonstrates differentiable modal logic (DML), implemented via Modal Logical Neural Networks (MLNNs), enabling systems to learn trust networks, causal chains, and regulatory boundaries from behavioral data alone. We present a unified neurosymbolic debugging framework through four modalities: epistemic (who to trust), temporal (when events cause failures), deontic (what actions are permitted), and doxastic (how to interpret agent confidence). Each modality is demonstrated on concrete multi-agent scenarios, from discovering deceptive alliances in diplomacy games to detecting LLM hallucinations, with complete implementations showing how logical contradictions become learnable optimization objectives. Key contributions for the neurosymbolic community: (1) interpretable learned structures where trust and causality are explicit parameters, not opaque embeddings; (2) knowledge injection via differentiable axioms that guide learning with sparse data (3) compositional multi-modal reasoning that combines epistemic, temporal, and deontic constraints; and (4) practical deployment patterns for monitoring, active control and communication of multi-agent systems. All code provided as executable Jupyter notebooks.

Don't Shoot The Breeze: Topic Continuity Model Using Nonlinear Naive Bayes With Attention

Utilizing Large Language Models (LLM) as chatbots in diverse business scenarios often presents the challenge of maintaining topic continuity. Abrupt shifts in topics can lead to poor user experiences and inefficient utilization of computational resources. In this paper, we present a topic continuity model aimed at assessing whether a response aligns with the initial conversation topic. Our model is built upon the expansion of the corresponding natural language understanding (NLU) model into quantifiable terms using a Naive Bayes approach. Subsequently, we have introduced an attention mechanism and logarithmic nonlinearity to enhance its capability to capture topic continuity. This approach allows us to convert the NLU model into an interpretable analytical formula. In contrast to many NLU models constrained by token limits, our proposed model can seamlessly handle conversations of any length with linear time complexity. Furthermore, the attention mechanism significantly improves the model's ability to identify topic continuity in complex conversations. According to our experiments, our model consistently outperforms traditional methods, particularly in handling lengthy and intricate conversations. This unique capability offers us an opportunity to ensure the responsible and interpretable use of LLMs.

Understanding Risk and Dependency in AI Chatbot Use from User Discourse

Generative AI systems are increasingly embedded in everyday life, yet empirical understanding of how psychological risk associated with AI use emerges, is experienced, and is regulated by users remains limited. We present a large-scale computational thematic analysis of posts collected between 2023 and 2025 from two Reddit communities, r/AIDangers and r/ChatbotAddiction, explicitly focused on AI-related harm and distress. Using a multi-agent, LLM-assisted thematic analysis grounded in Braun and Clarke's reflexive framework, we identify 14 recurring thematic categories and synthesize them into five higher-order experiential dimensions. To further characterize affective patterns, we apply emotion labeling using a BERT-based classifier and visualize emotional profiles across dimensions. Our findings reveal five empirically derived experiential dimensions of AI-related psychological risk grounded in real-world user discourse, with self-regulation difficulties emerging as the most prevalent and fear concentrated in concerns related to autonomy, control, and technical risk. These results provide early empirical evidence from lived user experience of how AI safety is perceived and emotionally experienced outside laboratory or speculative contexts, offering a foundation for future AI safety research, evaluation, and responsible governance.

Self-Regulated Reading with AI Support: An Eight-Week Study with Students

College students increasingly use AI chatbots to support academic reading, yet we lack granular understanding of how these interactions shape their reading experience and cognitive engagement. We conducted an eight-week longitudinal study with 15 undergraduates who used AI to support assigned readings in a course. We collected 838 prompts across 239 reading sessions and developed a coding schema categorizing prompts into four cognitive themes: Decoding, Comprehension, Reasoning, and Metacognition. Comprehension prompts dominated (59.6%), with Reasoning (29.8%), Metacognition (8.5%), and Decoding (2.1%) less frequent. Most sessions (72%) contained exactly three prompts, the required minimum of the reading assignment. Within sessions, students showed natural cognitive progression from comprehension toward reasoning, but this progression was truncated. Across eight weeks, students' engagement patterns remained stable, with substantial individual differences persisting throughout. Qualitative analysis revealed an intention-behavior gap: students recognized that effective prompting required effort but rarely applied this knowledge, with efficiency emerging as the primary driver. Students also strategically triaged their engagement based on interest and academic pressures, exhibiting a novel pattern of reading through AI rather than with it: using AI-generated summaries as primary material to filter which sections merited deeper attention. We discuss design implications for AI reading systems that scaffold sustained cognitive engagement.

Why do we Trust Chatbots? From Normative Principles to Behavioral Drivers

As chatbots increasingly blur the boundary between automated systems and human conversation, the foundations of trust in these systems warrant closer examination. While regulatory and policy frameworks tend to define trust in normative terms, the trust users place in chatbots often emerges from behavioral mechanisms. In many cases, this trust is not earned through demonstrated trustworthiness but is instead shaped by interactional design choices that leverage cognitive biases to influence user behavior. Based on this observation, we propose reframing chatbots not as companions or assistants, but as highly skilled salespeople whose objectives are determined by the deploying organization. We argue that the coexistence of competing notions of "trust" under a shared term obscures important distinctions between psychological trust formation and normative trustworthiness. Addressing this gap requires further research and stronger support mechanisms to help users appropriately calibrate trust in conversational AI systems.