Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Anna Polyanskaya
dblp:373/4255
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0009-0005-8563-2561ORCID · 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 |
Design research and methods · 77% Human-AI interaction · 23% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Design research and methods
design cognition |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | No Evidence for LLMs Being Useful in Problem Reframing · CHI 2025 |
Human-AI interaction › AI-assisted creativity
LLM-assisted design |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | No Evidence for LLMs Being Useful in Problem Reframing · CHI 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
qualitative analysis · 0.9controlled experiment · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | No Evidence for LLMs Being Useful in Problem ReframingabstractProblem reframing is a designerly activity wherein alternative perspectives are created to recast what a stated design problem is about. Generating alternative problem frames is challenging because it requires devising novel and useful perspectives that fit the given problem context. Large language models (LLMs) could assist this activity via their generative capability. However, it is not clear whether they can help designers produce high-quality frames. Therefore, we asked if there are benefits to working with LLMs. To this end, we compared three ways of using LLMs (N=280): 1) free-form, 2) direct generation, and 3) a structured approach informed by a theory of reframing. We found that using LLMs does not help improve the quality of problem frames. In fact, it increases the competence gap between experienced and inexperienced designers. Also, inexperienced ones perceived lower agency when working with LLMs. We conclude that there is no benefit to using LLMs in problem reframing and discuss possible factors for this lack of effect. Joon Gi Shin, Anna Polyanskaya, Andrés Lucero, Antti Oulasvirta |
CHI | 2 |