Help-seeking is a critical aspect of learning and problem-solving for computing students. Recent research has shown that many students are aware of generative AI (GenAI) tools; however, there are gaps in the extent and effectiveness of how students use them. With over two years of widespread GenAI usage, it is crucial to understand whether students' help-seeking behaviors with these tools have evolved and how. This paper presents findings from a repeated cross-sectional survey conducted among computing students across North American universities (n=95). Our results indicate shifts in GenAI usage patterns. In 2023, 34.1% of students (n=47) reported never using ChatGPT for help, ranking it fourth after online searches, peer support, and class forums. By 2024, this figure dropped sharply to 6.3% (n=48), with ChatGPT nearly matching online search as the most commonly used help resource. Despite this growing prevalence, there has been a decline in students' hourly and daily usage of GenAI tools, which may be attributed to a common tendency to underestimate usage frequency. These findings offer new insights into the evolving role of GenAI in computing education, highlighting its increasing acceptance and solidifying its position as a key help resource.

The integration of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) such as OpenAI's GPT-4 Vision into various sectors has marked a significant evolution in the field of artificial intelligence, particularly in the analysis and interpretation of visual data. This paper explores the practical application of GPT-4 Vision in the construction industry, focusing on its capabilities in monitoring and tracking the progress of construction projects. Utilizing high-resolution aerial imagery of construction sites, the study examines how GPT-4 Vision performs detailed scene analysis and tracks developmental changes over time. The findings demonstrate that while GPT-4 Vision is proficient in identifying construction stages, materials, and machinery, it faces challenges with precise object localization and segmentation. Despite these limitations, the potential for future advancements in this technology is considerable. This research not only highlights the current state and opportunities of using LVLMs in construction but also discusses future directions for enhancing the model's utility through domain-specific training and integration with other computer vision techniques and digital twins.

Handling imbalance in class distribution when building a classifier over tabular data has been a problem of long-standing interest. One popular approach is augmenting the training dataset with synthetically generated data. While classical augmentation techniques were limited to linear interpolation of existing minority class examples, recently higher capacity deep generative models are providing greater promise. However, handling of imbalance in class distribution when building a deep generative model is also a challenging problem, that has not been studied as extensively as imbalanced classifier model training. We show that state-of-the-art deep generative models yield significantly lower-quality minority examples than majority examples. %In this paper, we start with the observation that imbalanced data training of generative models trained imbalanced dataset which under-represent the minority class. We propose a novel technique of converting the binary class labels to ternary class labels by introducing a class for the region where minority and majority distributions overlap. We show that just this pre-processing of the training set, significantly improves the quality of data generated spanning several state-of-the-art diffusion and GAN-based models. While training the classifier using synthetic data, we remove the overlap class from the training data and justify the reasons behind the enhanced accuracy. We perform extensive experiments on four real-life datasets, five different classifiers, and five generative models demonstrating that our method enhances not only the synthesizer performance of state-of-the-art models but also the classifier performance.

But it's now clear that the case--filed more than two years before the generative AI boom began--was the first strike in a much larger war between content publishers and artificial intelligence companies now unfolding in courts across the country. The outcome could make, break, or reshape the information ecosystem and the entire AI industry--and in doing so, impact just about everyone across the internet. The plaintiffs include individual authors like Sarah Silverman and Ta Nehisi-Coates, visual artists, media companies like The New York Times, and music-industry giants like Universal Music Group. This wide variety of rights holders are alleging that AI companies have used their work to train what are often highly lucrative and powerful AI models in a manner that is tantamount to theft. Nearly every major generative AI company has been pulled into this legal fight, including OpenAI, Meta, Microsoft, Google, Anthropic, and Nvidia.

Are we ready for a dose of digital medicine? One of OpenAI's leading artificial intelligence models can outperform humans at diagnosing medical conditions, but does that mean AI is ready to replace human doctors? Not quite, although such technology could increasingly play a role in medical treatment. Adam Rodman at Harvard Medical Centre and his colleagues at universities, hospitals and companies across the US have put o1-preview, an AI model released by OpenAI in September, through a battery of tests designed to assess its performance on a range of medical tasks.

Generative AI has the potential to transform knowledge work, but further research is needed to understand how knowledge workers envision using and interacting with generative AI. We investigate the development of generative AI tools to support domain experts in knowledge work, examining task delegation and the design of human-AI interactions. Our research focused on designing a generative AI assistant to aid genetic professionals in analyzing whole genome sequences (WGS) and other clinical data for rare disease diagnosis. Through interviews with 17 genetics professionals, we identified current challenges in WGS analysis. We then conducted co-design sessions with six genetics professionals to determine tasks that could be supported by an AI assistant and considerations for designing interactions with the AI assistant. From our findings, we identified sensemaking as both a current challenge in WGS analysis and a process that could be supported by AI. We contribute an understanding of how domain experts envision interacting with generative AI in their knowledge work, a detailed empirical study of WGS analysis, and three design considerations for using generative AI to support domain experts in sensemaking during knowledge work. CCS CONCEPTS: Human-centered computing, Human-computer interaction, Empirical studies in HCI Additional Keywords and Phrases: whole genome sequencing, generative AI, large language models, knowledge work, sensemaking, co-design, rare disease Contact Author: Angela Mastrianni (This work was done during the author's internship at Microsoft Research) Ashley Mae Conard and Amanda K. Hall contributed equally

The banking sector, as a data-driven industry, relies on the availability of high-quality data to create value and protect its customers. The synergy between recent deep learning (DL) advancements, and the sector's data needs presents a growth potential of USD$4.6 trillion by 2035 (Accenture, 2017). However, deploying DL models is challenging due to the need for large, high-quality training data (Ryll et al., 2020), a difficulty made worse by the intricacy of financial transaction data (with complex data patterns and time-related characteristics), and strict regulations that limit data sharing (EU Regulation 2016/679, PCI DSS v4.0). One possible solution is to use synthetic data which is artificially generated rather than drawn from real-world events to increase samples in the minority class (Jordon et al., 2022), and allow safe data sharing between financial institutions while protecting privacy (Karst et al., 2024). This approach is essential for improving models used in assessing risks and detecting fraud.

Generative AI (GenAI) is advancing rapidly, and the literature in computing education is expanding almost as quickly. Initial responses to GenAI tools were mixed between panic and utopian optimism. Many were fast to point out the opportunities and challenges of GenAI. Researchers reported that these new tools are capable of solving most introductory programming tasks and are causing disruptions throughout the curriculum. These tools can write and explain code, enhance error messages, create resources for instructors, and even provide feedback and help for students like a traditional teaching assistant. In 2024, new research started to emerge on the effects of GenAI usage in the computing classroom. These new data involve the use of GenAI to support classroom instruction at scale and to teach students how to code with GenAI. In support of the former, a new class of tools is emerging that can provide personalized feedback to students on their programming assignments or teach both programming and prompting skills at the same time. With the literature expanding so rapidly, this report aims to summarize and explain what is happening on the ground in computing classrooms. We provide a systematic literature review; a survey of educators and industry professionals; and interviews with educators using GenAI in their courses, educators studying GenAI, and researchers who create GenAI tools to support computing education. The triangulation of these methods and data sources expands the understanding of GenAI usage and perceptions at this critical moment for our community.

Model collapse in synthetic data indicates that iterative training on self-generated data leads to a gradual decline in performance. With the proliferation of AI models, synthetic data will fundamentally reshape the web data ecosystem. Future GPT-{n} models will inevitably be trained on a blend of synthetic and humanproduced data. In this paper, we focus on two questions: what is the impact of synthetic data on language model training, and how to synthesize data without model collapse? We further conduct statistical analysis on synthetic data to uncover distributional shift phenomenon and over-concentration of n-gram features. Inspired by the above findings, we propose token editing on human-produced data to obtain semi-synthetic data. As a proof of concept, we theoretically demonstrate that token-level editing can prevent model collapse, as the test error is constrained by a finite upper bound. We conduct extensive experiments on pre-training from scratch, continual pre-training, and supervised finetuning. The results validate our theoretical proof that token-level editing improves data quality and enhances model performance. As generative artificial intelligence (AI) (Rombach et al., 2021; Achiam et al., 2023) becomes increasingly prevalent in research and industry, synthetic data will proliferate throughout the web data ecosystem. Consequently, future training of GPT-{n} on a mixture of synthetic and humanproduced data will be inevitable. Thus, model collapse is a critical concern that must be considered when training models on synthetic data. Model collapse refers to a degenerative process in which the output data of learned generative models contaminates the training sets of subsequent generations. As shown in Figure 1, iterative training coupled with data synthesis induces a progressive accumulation of test errors (Shumailov et al., 2024; Dohmatob et al., 2024a). Consequently, generative models increasingly overfit to synthetic data distributions, failing to capture the complexity in human-produced data.

Prior research indicates that to be able to mediate conflict, observers of disagreements between parties must be able to reliably distinguish the sources of their disagreement as stemming from differences in beliefs about what is true (causality) vs. differences in what they value (morality). In this paper, we test if OpenAI's Large Language Models GPT 3.5 and GPT 4 can perform this task and whether one or other type of disagreement proves particularly challenging for LLM's to diagnose. We replicate study 1 in Ko\c{c}ak et al. (2003), which employes a vignette design, with OpenAI's GPT 3.5 and GPT 4. We find that both LLMs have similar semantic understanding of the distinction between causal and moral codes as humans and can reliably distinguish between them. When asked to diagnose the source of disagreement in a conversation, both LLMs, compared to humans, exhibit a tendency to overestimate the extent of causal disagreement and underestimate the extent of moral disagreement in the moral misalignment condition. This tendency is especially pronounced for GPT 4 when using a proximate scale that relies on concrete language specific to an issue. GPT 3.5 does not perform as well as GPT4 or humans when using either the proximate or the distal scale. The study provides a first test of the potential for using LLMs to mediate conflict by diagnosing the root of disagreements in causal and evaluative codes.