Hugging Face Daily Papers · · 3 min read

"I didn't Make the Micro Decisions": Measuring, Inducing, and Exposing Goal-Level AI Contributions in Collaboration

Mirrored from Hugging Face Daily Papers for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.

<a href=\"https://cdn-uploads.huggingface.co/production/uploads/6576ace7769f3ee9bd7b1b88/emoKJb3GHvVGTGZ1IuGni.png\" rel=\"nofollow\"><img src=\"https://cdn-uploads.huggingface.co/production/uploads/6576ace7769f3ee9bd7b1b88/emoKJb3GHvVGTGZ1IuGni.png\" alt=\"concept\"></a></p>\n","updatedAt":"2026-05-22T13:07:05.440Z","author":{"_id":"6576ace7769f3ee9bd7b1b88","avatarUrl":"/avatars/5b5921e54413a37afde6ce017809c86e.svg","fullname":"Eunsu Kim","name":"EunsuKim","type":"user","isPro":false,"isHf":false,"isHfAdmin":false,"isMod":false,"followerCount":4,"isUserFollowing":false}},"numEdits":0,"identifiedLanguage":{"language":"en","probability":0.3792494535446167},"editors":["EunsuKim"],"editorAvatarUrls":["/avatars/5b5921e54413a37afde6ce017809c86e.svg"],"reactions":[],"isReport":false}}],"primaryEmailConfirmed":false,"paper":{"id":"2605.21363","authors":[{"_id":"6a1054c6a53a61ce2e422fcf","user":{"_id":"6576ace7769f3ee9bd7b1b88","avatarUrl":"/avatars/5b5921e54413a37afde6ce017809c86e.svg","isPro":false,"fullname":"Eunsu Kim","user":"EunsuKim","type":"user","name":"EunsuKim"},"name":"Eunsu Kim","status":"claimed_verified","statusLastChangedAt":"2026-05-22T15:59:02.143Z","hidden":false},{"_id":"6a1054c6a53a61ce2e422fd0","name":"Jessica R. Mindel","hidden":false},{"_id":"6a1054c6a53a61ce2e422fd1","name":"Kyungjin Kim","hidden":false},{"_id":"6a1054c6a53a61ce2e422fd2","name":"Sherry Tongshuang Wu","hidden":false}],"publishedAt":"2026-05-20T00:00:00.000Z","submittedOnDailyAt":"2026-05-22T00:00:00.000Z","title":"\"I didn't Make the Micro Decisions\": Measuring, Inducing, and Exposing Goal-Level AI Contributions in Collaboration","submittedOnDailyBy":{"_id":"6576ace7769f3ee9bd7b1b88","avatarUrl":"/avatars/5b5921e54413a37afde6ce017809c86e.svg","isPro":false,"fullname":"Eunsu Kim","user":"EunsuKim","type":"user","name":"EunsuKim"},"summary":"As large language models (LLMs) increasingly shape how users form, refine, and extend their goals, attributing contributions in human-AI collaboration becomes critical for users calibrating their own reliance and for evaluators assessing AI-assisted work. Yet existing methods focus on final artifacts, missing the process through which goals themselves are jointly shaped. We introduce a goal-level attribution framework, CoTrace, that decomposes explicit goals into verifiable requirements and traces both direct contributions and indirect influences across dialogue turns. Applying CoTrace to 638 real-world collaboration logs, we find that while models account for only 11-26% of goal-shaping contribution, they contribute substantially more on introducing lower-level concrete requirements, and make various kinds of indirect contributions. Through controlled simulations, we show that interaction design choices significantly affect model goal-shaping behavior. In a user study, exposing participants to goal-level analyses shifts their perceived contributions by nearly 2 points on a 5-point scale, revealing systematic miscalibration in how users understand their own AI-assisted work.","upvotes":1,"discussionId":"6a1054c6a53a61ce2e422fd3","projectPage":"https://rladmstn1714.github.io/CoTrace/","githubRepo":"https://github.com/rladmstn1714/CoTrace","githubRepoAddedBy":"user","ai_summary":"A goal-level attribution framework called CoTrace is introduced to analyze how large language models contribute to goal shaping in human-AI collaboration, revealing that while models account for a small percentage of direct contributions, they play a significant role in introducing concrete requirements and making indirect contributions.","ai_keywords":["large language models","goal-level attribution","CoTrace","verifiable requirements","dialogue turns","human-AI collaboration","goal-shaping contribution","indirect influences","controlled simulations","user study"],"githubStars":1},"canReadDatabase":false,"canManagePapers":false,"canSubmit":false,"hasHfLevelAccess":false,"upvoted":false,"upvoters":[{"_id":"6576ace7769f3ee9bd7b1b88","avatarUrl":"/avatars/5b5921e54413a37afde6ce017809c86e.svg","isPro":false,"fullname":"Eunsu Kim","user":"EunsuKim","type":"user"}],"acceptLanguages":["en"],"dailyPaperRank":0,"markdownContentUrl":"https://huggingface.co/buckets/huggingchat/papers-content/resolve/2605/2605.21363.md"}">
Papers
arxiv:2605.21363

"I didn't Make the Micro Decisions": Measuring, Inducing, and Exposing Goal-Level AI Contributions in Collaboration

Published on May 20
· Submitted by
Eunsu Kim
on May 22
Authors:
,
,

Abstract

A goal-level attribution framework called CoTrace is introduced to analyze how large language models contribute to goal shaping in human-AI collaboration, revealing that while models account for a small percentage of direct contributions, they play a significant role in introducing concrete requirements and making indirect contributions.

AI-generated summary

As large language models (LLMs) increasingly shape how users form, refine, and extend their goals, attributing contributions in human-AI collaboration becomes critical for users calibrating their own reliance and for evaluators assessing AI-assisted work. Yet existing methods focus on final artifacts, missing the process through which goals themselves are jointly shaped. We introduce a goal-level attribution framework, CoTrace, that decomposes explicit goals into verifiable requirements and traces both direct contributions and indirect influences across dialogue turns. Applying CoTrace to 638 real-world collaboration logs, we find that while models account for only 11-26% of goal-shaping contribution, they contribute substantially more on introducing lower-level concrete requirements, and make various kinds of indirect contributions. Through controlled simulations, we show that interaction design choices significantly affect model goal-shaping behavior. In a user study, exposing participants to goal-level analyses shifts their perceived contributions by nearly 2 points on a 5-point scale, revealing systematic miscalibration in how users understand their own AI-assisted work.

Community

Paper author Paper submitter about 13 hours ago

concept

Upload images, audio, and videos by dragging in the text input, pasting, or clicking here.
Tap or paste here to upload images

· Sign up or log in to comment

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2605.21363
Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2605.21363 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2605.21363 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2605.21363 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.

Sign in →

No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.

More from Hugging Face Daily Papers