Collaborative problem solving (CPS) is a fundamental practice in middle-school mathematics education; however, student groups frequently stall or struggle without ongoing teacher support. Recent work has explored how Generative AI tools can be designed to support one-on-one tutoring, but little is known about how AI can be designed as peer learning partners in collaborative learning contexts. We conducted a participatory design study with 24 middle school students, who first engaged in mathematics CPS tasks with AI peers in a technology probe, and then collaboratively designed their ideal AI peer. Our findings reveal that students envision an AI peer as competent in mathematics yet explicitly deferential, providing progressive scaffolds such as hints and checks under clear student control. Students preferred a tone of friendly expertise over exaggerated personas. We also discuss design recommendations and implications for AI peers in middle school mathematics CPS.

Long user history is highly valuable signal for recommendation systems, but effectively incorporating it often comes with high cost in terms of data center power consumption and GPU. In this work, we chose offline embedding over end-to-end sequence length optimization methods to enable extremely long user sequence modeling as a cost-effective solution, and propose a new user embedding learning strategy, multi-slicing and summarization, that generates highly generalizable user representation of user's long-term stable interest. History length we encoded in this embedding is up to 70,000 and on average 40,000. This embedding, named as DV365, is proven highly incremental on top of advanced attentive user sequence models deployed in Instagram. Produced by a single upstream foundational model, it is launched in 15 different models across Instagram and Threads with significant impact, and has been production battle-proven for >1 year since our first launch.

Generative AI (GenAI), especially Large Language Models (LLMs), is rapidly reshaping both programming workflows and computer science education. Many programmers now incorporate GenAI tools into their workflows, including for collaborative coding tasks such as pair programming. While prior research has demonstrated the benefits of traditional pair programming and begun to explore GenAI-assisted coding, the role of LLM-based tools as collaborators in pair programming remains underexamined. In this work, we conducted a mixed-methods study with 39 undergraduate students to examine how GenAI influences collaboration, learning, and performance in pair programming. Specifically, students completed six in-class assignments under three conditions: Traditional Pair Programming (PP), Pair Programming with GenAI (PAI), and Solo Programming with GenAI (SAI). They used both LLM-based inline completion tools (e.g., GitHub Copilot) and LLM-based conversational tools (e.g., ChatGPT). Our results show that students in the PAI condition achieved the highest assignment scores, whereas those in the SAI condition attained the lowest. Additionally, students' attitudes toward LLMs' programming capabilities improved significantly after collaborating with LLM-based tools, and preferences were largely shaped by the perceived usefulness for completing assignments and learning programming skills, as well as the quality of collaboration. Our qualitative findings further reveal that while students appreciated LLM-based tools as valuable pair programming partners, they also identified limitations (e.g., contextual constraints and possibly outdated knowledge bases), and had different expectations compared to human teammates. Students in our study primarily relied on LLM-based tools for syntax clarification and conceptual guidance, while turning to human partners for idea exchanges. Our study provides one of the first empirical evaluations of GenAI as a pair programming collaborator through a comparison of three conditions (PP, PAI, and SAI). We also discuss the design implications and pedagogical considerations for future GenAI-assisted pair programming approaches.

Large language models (LLMs) have gained considerable attention for their excellent natural language processing capabilities. Nonetheless, these LLMs present many challenges, particularly in the realm of trustworthiness. This paper introduces TrustLLM, a comprehensive study of trustworthiness in LLMs, including principles for different dimensions of trustworthiness, established benchmark, evaluation, and analysis of trustworthiness for mainstream LLMs, and discussion of open challenges and future directions. Specifically, we first propose a set of principles for trustworthy LLMs that span eight different dimensions. Based on these principles, we further establish a benchmark across six dimensions including truthfulness, safety, fairness, robustness, privacy, and machine ethics. We then present a study evaluating 16 mainstream LLMs in TrustLLM, consisting of over 30 datasets. Our findings firstly show that in general trustworthiness and capability (i.e., functional effectiveness) are positively related. Secondly, our observations reveal that proprietary LLMs generally outperform most open-source counterparts in terms of trustworthiness, raising concerns about the potential risks of widely accessible open-source LLMs. However, a few open-source LLMs come very close to proprietary ones, suggesting that open-source models can achieve high levels of trustworthiness without additional mechanisms like moderator, offering valuable insights for developers in this field. Thirdly, it is important to note that some LLMs may be overly calibrated towards exhibiting trustworthiness, to the extent that they compromise their utility by mistakenly treating benign prompts as harmful and consequently not responding. Besides these observations, we’ve uncovered key insights into the multifaceted trustworthiness in LLMs. We emphasize the importance of ensuring transparency not only in the models themselves but also in the technologies that underpin trustworthiness. We advocate that the establishment of an AI alliance between industry, academia, the open-source community to foster collaboration is imperative to advance the trustworthiness of LLMs.

The integration of AI assistants, especially through the development of Large Language Models (LLMs), into computer science education has sparked significant debate, highlighting both their potential to augment student learning and the risks associated with their misuse. An emerging body of work has looked into using LLMs in education, primarily focusing on evaluating the performance of existing models or conducting short-term human subject studies. However, very little work has examined the impacts of LLM-powered assistants on students in entry-level programming courses, particularly in real-world contexts and over extended periods. To address this research gap, we conducted a semester-long, between-subjects study with 50 students using CodeTutor, an LLM-powered assistant developed by our research team. Our study results show that students who used CodeTutor (the "CodeTutor group" as the experimental group) achieved statistically significant improvements in their final scores compared to peers who did not use the tool (the "control group"). Within the CodeTutor group, those without prior experience with LLM-powered tools demonstrated significantly greater performance gain than their counterparts. We also found that students expressed positive feedback regarding CodeTutor's capability to comprehend their queries and assist in learning programming language syntax. However, they had concerns about CodeTutor's limited role in developing critical thinking skills. Over the course of the semester, students' agreement with CodeTutor's suggestions decreased, with a growing preference for support from traditional human teaching assistants. Our findings also show that students turned to CodeTutor for different tasks, including programming task completion, syntax comprehension, and debugging, particularly seeking help for programming assignments. Our analysis further reveals that the quality of user prompts was significantly correlated with CodeTutor's response effectiveness. Building upon these results, we discuss the implications of our findings for the need to integrate Generative AI literacy into curricula to foster critical thinking skills, and turn to examining the temporal dynamics of user engagement with LLM-powered tools. We further discuss the discrepancy between the anticipated functions of tools and students' actual capabilities, which sheds light on the need for tailored strategies to improve educational outcomes.