EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Nikki Nasseri
dblp:418/2763
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0007-3756-0932ORCID · 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 · 77% Collaborative and social computing · 23% | |
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Visualization and visual analytics · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Visualization and visual analytics › information visualization › metadata visualization
provenance visualization |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | DraftMarks: Enhancing Transparency in Human-AI Co-Writing Through Interactive Skeuomorphic Process Traces · CHI 2026 |
Human-AI interaction › AI-assisted writing
human-AI co-writing |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | DraftMarks: Enhancing Transparency in Human-AI Co-Writing Through Interactive Skeuomorphic Process Traces · CHI 2026 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
user study · 2.0skeuomorphic design · 2.0formative study · 2.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | DraftMarks: Enhancing Transparency in Human-AI Co-Writing Through Interactive Skeuomorphic Process TracesabstractAs generative AI becomes part of everyday writing, questions of transparency and productive human effort are increasingly important. Educators, reviewers, and readers want to understand how AI shaped the process. Where was human effort focused? What role did AI play in the creation of the work? How did the interaction unfold? Existing approaches often reduce these dynamics to summary metrics or simplified provenance. We introduce DraftMarks, an augmented reading tool that supports readers in interpreting how text was constructed with AI through familiar physical metaphors. DraftMarks employs skeuomorphic encodings such as eraser crumbs to convey the intensity of revision, and masking tape or smudges to mark AI-generated content, simulating the process within the final written artifact. By using data from writer-AI interactions, DraftMarks’ algorithm computes various collaboration metrics and writing traces. Through a formative study, we identified computational logic for different readership, and evaluated DraftMarks through a Prolific study for its effectiveness in assessing AI co-authored writing. Momin Naushad Siddiqui, Nikki Nasseri, Adam Coscia, Roy D. Pea, Hari Subramonyam |
CHI | 2 |