Large language models (LLMs) exhibit dynamic capabilities and appear to comprehend complex and ambiguous natural language prompts. However, calibrating LLM interactions is challenging for interface designers and end-users alike. A central issue is our limited grasp of how human cognitive processes begin with a goal and form intentions for executing actions, a blindspot even in established interaction models such as Norman’s gulfs of execution and evaluation. To address this gap, we theorize how end-users ‘envision’ translating their goals into clear intentions and craft prompts to obtain the desired LLM response. We define a process of Envisioning by highlighting three misalignments on not knowing: (1) what the task should be, (2) how to instruct the LLM to do the task, and (3) what to expect for the LLM’s output in meeting the goal. Finally, we make recommendations to narrow the gulf of envisioning in human-LLM interactions.

In conventional software development, user experience (UX) designers and engineers collaborate through separation of concerns (SoC): designers create human interface specifications, and engineers build to those specifications. However, we argue that Human-AI systems thwart SoC because human needs must shape the design of the AI interface, the underlying AI sub-components, and training data. How do designers and engineers currently collaborate on AI and UX design? To find out, we interviewed 21 industry professionals (UX researchers, AI engineers, data scientists, and managers) across 14 organizations about their collaborative work practices and associated challenges. We find that hidden information encapsulated by SoC challenges collaboration across design and engineering concerns. Practitioners describe inventing ad-hoc representations exposing low-level design and implementation details (which we characterize as leaky abstractions) to “puncture” SoC and share information across expertise boundaries. We identify how leaky abstractions are employed to collaborate at the AI-UX boundary and formalize a process of creating and using leaky abstractions.

When prototyping AI experiences (AIX), interface designers seek effective ways to support end-user tasks through AI capabilities. However, AI poses challenges to design due to its dynamic behavior in response to training data, end-user data, and feedback. Designers must consider AI's uncertainties and offer adaptations such as explainability, error recovery, and automation vs. human task control. Unfortunately, current prototyping tools assume a black-box view of AI, forcing designers to work with separate tools to explore machine learning models, understand model performance, and align interface choices with model behavior. This introduces friction to rapid and iterative prototyping. We propose Model-Informed Prototyping (MIP), a workflow for AIX design that combines model exploration with UI prototyping tasks. Our system, ProtoAI, allows designers to directly incorporate model outputs into interface designs, evaluate design choices across different inputs, and iteratively revise designs by analyzing model breakdowns.

Thinking of technology as a design material is appealing. It encourages designers to explore the material’s properties to understand its capabilities and limitations—a prerequisite to generative design thinking. However, as a material, AI resists this approach because its properties only emerge as part of the user experience design. Therefore, designers and AI engineers must collaborate in new ways to create both the material and its application experience. We investigate the co-creation process through a design study with 10 pairs of designers and engineers. We find that design ‘probes’ with user data are a useful tool in defining AI materials. Through data probes, designers construct designerly representations of the envisioned AI experience (AIX) to identify desirable AI characteristics. Data probes facilitate divergent design thinking, material testing, and design validation. Based on our findings, we propose a process model for co-creating AIX and offer design considerations for incorporating data probes in AIX design tools.

When prototyping AI experiences (AIX), interface designers seek useful and usable ways to support end-user tasks through AI capabilities. However, AI poses challenges to design due to its dynamic behavior in response to training data, end-user data, and feedback. Designers must consider AI’s uncertainties and offer adaptations such as explainability, error recovery, and automation vs. human task control. Unfortunately, current prototyping tools assume a black-box view of AI, forcing designers to work with separate tools to explore machine learning models, understand model performance, and align interface choices with model behavior. This introduces friction to rapid and iterative prototyping. We propose Model-Informed Prototyping (MIP), a workflow for AIX design that combines model exploration with UI prototyping tasks. Our system, ProtoAI, allows designers to directly incorporate model outputs into interface designs, evaluate design choices across different inputs, and iteratively revise designs by analyzing model breakdowns. We demonstrate how ProtoAI can readily operationalize human-AI design guidelines. Our user study finds that designers can effectively engage in MIP to create and evaluate AI-powered interfaces during AIX design.

Learning from text is a constructive activity in which sentence-level information is combined by the reader to build coherent mental models. With increasingly complex texts, forming a mental model becomes challenging due to a lack of background knowledge, and limits in working memory and attention. To address this, we are taught knowledge externalization strategies such as active reading and diagramming. Unfortunately, paper-and-pencil approaches may not always be appropriate, and software solutions create friction through difficult input modalities, limited workflow support, and barriers between reading and diagramming. For all but the simplest text, building coherent diagrams can be tedious and difficult. We propose Active Diagramming, an approach extending familiar active reading strategies to the task of diagram construction. Our prototype, texSketch, combines pen-and-ink interactions with natural language processing to reduce the cost of producing diagrams while maintaining the cognitive effort necessary for comprehension. Our user study finds that readers can effectively create diagrams without disrupting reading.

In this article, we examine learning within a cooperative system. We focus on the role of learning from errors in a context where regular attrition of group members occurs. Specifically, the study involved observation of distributed activity in the team navigation of a large naval vessel. Analyses revealed frequent individual errors; however, successful detection and correction of errors also occurred. Thus, the cooperative system simultaneously allowed high component error and ensured low system output error. This robustness is an especially valuable feature for distributed systems because it provides for needed on-the-job learning while maintaining a high level of overall performance. Errors were observed to function as opportunities for instruction based on a novice's demonstrated "need to know." The distributed system was found to contain certain design tradeoffs that are exploited for their utility in learning (viz., distributing knowledge across the team and providing multiple perspectives for error detection). The results are applicable to the design of computer-supported cooperative tasks and provide guidelines for task organization that facilitates performance while incorporating the ability to learn from errors.