Academic advising is critical to student success in higher education, yet high student-to-advisor ratios limit advisors' capacity to provide timely support, particularly during peak periods. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) present opportunities to enhance the advising process. We present AdvisingWise, a multi-agent system that automates time-consuming tasks, such as information retrieval and response drafting, while preserving human oversight. AdvisingWise leverages authoritative institutional resources and adaptively prompts students about their academic backgrounds to generate reliable, personalized responses. All system responses undergo human advisor validation before delivery to students. We evaluate AdvisingWise through a mixed-methods approach: (1) expert evaluation on responses of 20 sample queries, (2) LLM-as-a-judge evaluation of the information retrieval strategy, and (3) a user study with 8 academic advisors to assess the system's practical utility. Our evaluation shows that AdvisingWise produces accurate, personalized responses. Advisors reported increasingly positive perceptions after using AdvisingWise, as their initial concerns about reliability and personalization diminished. We conclude by discussing the implications of human-AI synergy on the practice of academic advising.

As large language models (LLMs) become ubiquitous in workplace tools and decision-making processes, ensuring explainability and fostering user trust are critical. Although advancements in LLM engineering continue, human-centered design is still catching up, particularly when it comes to embedding transparency and trust into AI interfaces. This study evaluates user experiences with two distinct AI interfaces - node-tree interfaces and chatbot interfaces - to assess their performance in exploratory, follow-up inquiry, decision-making, and problem-solving tasks. Our design-driven approach introduces a node-tree interface that visually structures AI-generated responses into hierarchically organized, interactive nodes, allowing users to navigate, refine, and follow up on complex information. In a comparative study with n=20 business users, we observed that while the chatbot interface effectively supports linear, step-by-step queries, it is the node-tree interface that enhances brainstorming. Quantitative and qualitative findings indicate that node-tree interfaces not only improve task performance and decision-making support but also promote higher levels of user trust by preserving context. Our findings suggest that adaptive AI interfaces capable of switching between structured visualizations and conversational formats based on task requirements can significantly enhance transparency and user confidence in AI-powered systems. This work contributes actionable insights to the fields of human-robot interaction and AI design, particularly for enterprise applications where trust-building is critical for teams.

Online questionnaires are being swamped by AI-generated responses – potentially polluting a vital data source for scientists. Platforms like Prolific pay participants small sums for answering questions posed by researchers. They are popular among academics as an easy way to gather participants for behavioural studies. Anne-Marie Nussberger and her colleagues at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development in Berlin, Germany, decided to investigate how often respondents use artificial intelligence after noticing examples in their own work. "The incidence rates that we were observing were really shocking," she says.

Beneath a recent Los Angeles Times opinion piece about the dangers of artificial intelligence, there is now an AI-generated response about how AI will make storytelling more democratic. "Some in the film world have met the arrival of generative AI tools with open arms. We and others see it as something deeply troubling on the horizon," the co-directors of the Archival Producers Alliance, Rachel Antell, Stephanie Jenkins and Jennifer Petrucelli, wrote on 1 March. Published over the Academy Awards weekend, their comment piece focused on the specific dangers of AI-generated footage within documentary film, and the possibility that unregulated use of AI could shatter viewers' "faith in the veracity of visuals". On Monday, the Los Angeles Times's just-debuted AI tool, "Insight", labeled this argument as politically "center-left" and provided four "different views on the topic" underneath.

In this paper, we investigate how individuals evaluate human and large langue models generated responses to popular questions when the source of the content is either concealed or disclosed. Through a controlled field experiment, participants were presented with a set of questions, each accompanied by a response generated by either a human or an AI. In a randomized design, half of the participants were informed of the response's origin while the other half remained unaware. Our findings indicate that, overall, participants tend to prefer AI-generated responses. However, when the AI origin is revealed, this preference diminishes significantly, suggesting that evaluative judgments are influenced by the disclosure of the response's provenance rather than solely by its quality. These results underscore a bias against AI-generated content, highlighting the societal challenge of improving the perception of AI work in contexts where quality assessments should be paramount.

--The Qwen 2.5 3B base model was fine-tuned to generate contextually rich and engaging movie dialogue, leveraging the Cornell Movie-Dialog Corpus, a curated dataset of movie conversations. Due to limitations in GPU computing and VRAM, the training process began with the 0.5B model, progressively scaling up to the 1.5B and 3B versions as efficiency improvements were implemented. The Qwen 2.5 series, developed by Alibaba Group, stands at the forefront of small open-source pre-trained models, particularly excelling in creative tasks compared to alternatives like Meta's Llama 3.2 and Google's Gemma. Results demonstrate the ability of small models to produce high-quality, realistic dialogue, offering a promising approach for real-time, context-sensitive conversation generation. This project aimed to fine-tune a small, pretrained large language model (LLM) to generate realistic and compelling movie dialogue when prompted with a preceding line. To achieve this, the Qwen 2.5 3B base model was fine-tuned using the Cornell Movie-Dialog Corpus, a curated dataset of movie dialogue [1].

Contribution: This Full paper in the Research Category track describes a practical, scalable platform that seamlessly integrates Generative AI (GenAI) with online educational forums, offering a novel approach to augment the instructional capabilities of staff. The platform empowers instructional staff to efficiently manage, refine, and approve responses by facilitating interaction between student posts and a Large Language Model (LLM). This contribution enhances the efficiency and effectiveness of instructional support and significantly improves the quality and speed of responses provided to students, thereby enriching the overall learning experience. Background: Grounded in Vygotsky's socio-cultural theory and the concept of the More Knowledgeable Other (MKO), the study examines how GenAI can act as an auxiliary MKO to enrich educational dialogue between students and instructors. Research Question: How effective is GenAI in reducing the workload of instructional staff when used to pre-answer student questions posted on educational discussion forums? Methodology: Using a mixed-methods approach in large introductory programming courses, human Teaching Assistants (AI-TAs) employed an AI-assisted platform to pre-answer student queries. We analyzed efficiency indicators like the frequency of modifications to AI-generated responses and gathered qualitative feedback from AI-TAs. Findings: The findings indicate no significant difference in student reception to responses generated by AI-TAs compared to those provided by human instructors. This suggests that GenAI can effectively meet educational needs when adequately managed. Moreover, AI-TAs experienced a reduction in the cognitive load required for responding to queries, pointing to GenAI's potential to enhance instructional efficiency without compromising the quality of education.

This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of how AI-generated medical responses are perceived and evaluated by non-experts. A total of 300 participants gave evaluations for medical responses that were either written by a medical doctor on an online healthcare platform, or generated by a large language model and labeled by physicians as having high or low accuracy. Results showed that participants could not effectively distinguish between AI-generated and Doctors' responses and demonstrated a preference for AI-generated responses, rating High Accuracy AI-generated responses as significantly more valid, trustworthy, and complete/satisfactory. Low Accuracy AI-generated responses on average performed very similar to Doctors' responses, if not more. Participants not only found these low-accuracy AI-generated responses to be valid, trustworthy, and complete/satisfactory but also indicated a high tendency to follow the potentially harmful medical advice and incorrectly seek unnecessary medical attention as a result of the response provided. This problematic reaction was comparable if not more to the reaction they displayed towards doctors' responses. This increased trust placed on inaccurate or inappropriate AI-generated medical advice can lead to misdiagnosis and harmful consequences for individuals seeking help. Further, participants were more trusting of High Accuracy AI-generated responses when told they were given by a doctor and experts rated AI-generated responses significantly higher when the source of the response was unknown. Both experts and non-experts exhibited bias, finding AI-generated responses to be more thorough and accurate than Doctors' responses but still valuing the involvement of a Doctor in the delivery of their medical advice. Ensuring AI systems are implemented with medical professionals should be the future of using AI for the delivery of medical advice.

Condé Nast, the media conglomerate that owns publications such as The New Yorker, Vogue and Wired, has sent a cease-and-desist letter to AI-powered search startup Perplexity, according to The Information. The letter, which was sent on Monday, demands that Perplexity stop using content from Condé Nast publications in its AI-generated responses and accused the startup of plagiarism. The move makes Condé Nast the latest in a growing list of publishers taking a stand against the unauthorized use of their content by AI companies, and comes a month after similar action taken by Forbes. Perplexity and Condé Nast did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Engadget. A recent investigation from Wired reveled that the startup's web crawlers do not respect robots.txt,

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) is integrated into everyday technology, including news, education, and social media. AI has further pervaded private conversations as conversational partners, auto-completion, and response suggestions. As social media becomes young people's main method of peer support exchange, we need to understand when and how AI can facilitate and assist in such exchanges in a beneficial, safe, and socially appropriate way. We asked 622 young people to complete an online survey and evaluate blinded human- and AI-generated responses to help-seeking messages. We found that participants preferred the AI-generated response to situations about relationships, self-expression, and physical health. However, when addressing a sensitive topic, like suicidal thoughts, young people preferred the human response. We also discuss the role of training in online peer support exchange and its implications for supporting young people's well-being. Disclaimer: This paper includes sensitive topics, including suicide ideation. Reader discretion is advised.