Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Hasan Amin
dblp:430/0616
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0001-4170-9695ORCID · 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 |
Trustworthy machine learning · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Human-AI interaction
AI-assisted decision-making |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Understanding the Effects of AI-Assisted Critical Thinking on Human-AI Decision Making · CHI 2026 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
counterfactual explanation |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Understanding the Effects of AI-Assisted Critical Thinking on Human-AI Decision Making · CHI 2026 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Understanding the Effects of AI-Assisted Critical Thinking on Human-AI Decision Making · CHI 2026 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
counterfactual analysis · 2.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Understanding the Effects of AI-Assisted Critical Thinking on Human-AI Decision MakingabstractDespite the growing prevalence of human-AI decision making, the human-AI team’s decision performance often remains suboptimal, partially due to insufficient examination of humans’ own reasoning. In this paper, we explore designing AI systems that directly analyze humans’ decision rationales and encourage critical reflection of their own decisions. We introduce the AI-Assisted Critical Thinking (AACT) framework, which leverages a domain-specific AI model’s counterfactual analysis of human decision to help decision-makers identify potential flaws in their decision argument and support the correction of them. Through a case study on house price prediction, we find that AACT outperforms traditional AI-based decision-support in reducing over-reliance on AI, though also triggering higher cognitive load. Subgroup analysis reveals AACT can be particularly beneficial for some decision-makers such as those very familiar with AI technologies. We conclude by discussing the practical implications of our findings, use cases and design choices of AACT, and considerations for using AI to facilitate critical thinking. Harry Yizhou Tian, Hasan Amin, Ming Yin 0001 |
CHI | 2 |