Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Daria Savchenko

dblp:361/1748 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0002-6916-8106ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Human-AI interaction · 100%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Language models and text generation · 100%

Topics — the 1 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Human-AI interaction › AI-assisted writing
creative writing support
0.712023
Where to Hide a Stolen Elephant: Leaps in Creative Writing with Multimodal Machine Intelligence · ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 2023

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

user study · 1.3interviews · 1.3elicitation · 1.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 Where to Hide a Stolen Elephant: Leaps in Creative Writing with Multimodal Machine Intelligence
abstract
While developing a story, novices and published writers alike have had to look outside themselves for inspiration. Language models have recently been able to generate text fluently, producing new stochastic narratives upon request. However, effectively integrating such capabilities with human cognitive faculties and creative processes remains challenging. We propose to investigate this integration with a multimodal writing support interface that offers writing suggestions textually, visually, and aurally. We conduct an extensive study that combines elicitation of prior expectations before writing, observation and semi-structured interviews during writing, and outcome evaluations after writing. Our results illustrate the individual and situational variation in machine-in-the-loop writing approaches, suggestion acceptance, and ways the system is helpful. Centrally, we report how participants perform integrative leaps , by which they do cognitive work to integrate suggestions of varying semantic relevance into their developing stories. We interpret these findings, offering modeling and design recommendations for future creative writing support technologies.
Nikhil Singh 0003, Guillermo Bernal, Daria Savchenko, Elena L. Glassman
ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact.3