Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Maya E. Detwiller
dblp:402/9522
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0005-1641-9468ORCID · 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.
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Information retrieval · 100% | |
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper |
Human-AI interaction · 77% Collaborative and social computing · 23% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Information retrieval › interactive information retrieval
exploratory search |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Forage: Understanding LLM-facilitated sensemaking of conversation data · CHI 2026 |
Information retrieval
retrieval-augmented generation |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Forage: Understanding LLM-facilitated sensemaking of conversation data · CHI 2026 |
Collaborative and social computing
computer-supported cooperative work |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Forage: Understanding LLM-facilitated sensemaking of conversation data · CHI 2026 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
user study · 2.0retrieval-augmented generation · 2.0large language model · 2.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Forage: Understanding LLM-facilitated sensemaking of conversation dataabstractLarge language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to make sense of unstructured data, but their use in contexts like conversation analysis, where sensemaking is often human-driven, iterative, and subjective, is underexplored. We introduce Forage, a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) tool for making sense of conversation data through exploratory search. We report on user studies with 27 participants across four user groups—including NPR journalists and municipal staff—observing how Forage is used to explore and analyze conversation data. We find Forage supports insight confirmation and generation, providing structure and novel insight about search results compared to a non-LLM-enabled search tool. Driven by the goal of generating multiple perspectives in Forage, we present Wild Forage, a design provocation that generates and presents multiple interpretations of the same data along a specified axis of potential interpretive difference, like political orientation. Expert user studies show that exposure to other interpretations through Wild Forage can help users meaningfully consider their assumptions in sensemaking, but findings also highlight the importance of future work to leverage this opportunity while avoiding potential harms, like stereotyping. Hope Schroeder, Doug Beeferman, Maya E. Detwiller, Dimitra Dimitrakopoulou, Deb Roy |
CHI | 3 |