Roundup: Characterizing Web Search in the Age of Generative AI; Do Large Language Models Speak Scientific Workflows?; and More Preprints

Below, find links to five preprints shared for the first time or updated in recent days and made available on arXiv . We hope one or more will be of interest to you.

LibraryLens: An Interactive Tool for Exploring and Arranging Digital Bookshelves

Existing digital book management platforms often fail to capture the rich spatial and visual cues inherent to physical bookshelves, hindering users’ ability to fully engage with their collections. We present LibraryLens, a novel visualization tool that addresses these shortcomings by enabling users to create, explore, and interact with immersive, two-dimensional representations of their personal libraries. The tool also caters to the growing trend of social sharing within online book communities, allowing users to create visually appealing representations of their libraries that can be easily shared on social platforms. Despite limitations inherent to the metadata being rendered, formative evaluations suggest that LibraryLens has the potential to lower the barrier to entry for users seeking to optimize their book organization without the constraints of physical space or manual labor, ultimately fostering deeper engagement with their personal libraries.

Characterizing Web Search in the Age of Generative AI

The advent of LLMs has given rise to a new type of web search: Generative search, where LLMs retrieve web pages related to a query and generate a single, coherent text as a response. This output modality stands in stark contrast to traditional web search, where results are returned as a ranked list of independent web pages. In this paper, we ask: Along what dimensions do generative search outputs differ from traditional web search? We compare Google, a traditional web search engine, with four generative search engines from two providers (Google and OpenAI) across queries from four domains. Our analysis reveals intriguing differences. Most generative search engines cover a wider range of sources compared to web search. Generative search engines vary in the degree to which they rely on internal knowledge contained within the model parameters v.s. external knowledge retrieved from the web. Generative search engines surface varying sets of concepts, creating new opportunities for enhancing search diversity and serendipity. Our results also highlight the need for revisiting evaluation criteria for web search in the age of Generative AI.

Do Large Language Models Speak Scientific Workflows?

With the advent of large language models (LLMs), there is a growing interest in applying LLMs to scientific tasks. In this work, we conduct an experimental study to explore applicability of LLMs for configuring, annotating, translating, explaining, and generating scientific workflows. We use 5 different workflow specific experiments and evaluate several open- and closed-source language models using state-of-the-art workflow systems. Our studies reveal that LLMs often struggle with workflow related tasks due to their lack of knowledge of scientific workflows. We further observe that the performance of LLMs varies across experiments and workflow systems. Our findings can help workflow developers and users in understanding LLMs capabilities in scientific workflows, and motivate further research applying LLMs to workflows.

Taxonomy of User Needs and Actions

The growing ubiquity of conversational AI highlights the need for frameworks that capture not only users’ instrumental goals but also the situated, adaptive, and social practices through which they achieve them. Existing taxonomies of conversational behavior either overgeneralize, remain domain-specific, or reduce interactions to narrow dialogue functions. To address this gap, we introduce the Taxonomy of User Needs and Actions (TUNA), an empirically grounded framework developed through iterative qualitative analysis of 1193 human-AI conversations, supplemented by theoretical review and validation across diverse contexts. TUNA organizes user actions into a three-level hierarchy encompassing behaviors associated with information seeking, synthesis, procedural guidance, content creation, social interaction, and meta-conversation. By centering user agency and appropriation practices, TUNA enables multi-scale evaluation, supports policy harmonization across products, and provides a backbone for layering domain-specific taxonomies. This work contributes a systematic vocabulary for describing AI use, advancing both scholarly understanding and practical design of safer, more responsive, and more accountable conversational systems.

VeriCite: Towards Reliable Citations in Retrieval-Augmented Generation via Rigorous Verification

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has emerged as a crucial approach for enhancing the responses of large language models (LLMs) with external knowledge sources. Despite the impressive performance in complex question-answering tasks, RAG still struggles with hallucinations. Attributing RAG-generated content through in-line citations has demonstrated potential in reducing hallucinations and facilitating human verification. Existing citation generation methods primarily rely on either fine-tuning the generator or employing post-processing approaches for citation matching. However, the former approach demands substantial annotated data and computational resources, while the latter often encounters difficulties in managing multiple citations and frequently produces suboptimal results. In this paper, we introduce a novel framework, called VeriCite, designed to rigorously validate supporting evidence and enhance answer attribution. Specifically, VeriCite breaks down into a three-stage generation: 1) The initial answer generation first generates a response based on all available contexts and has its claims verified through the NLI model; 2) the supporting evidence selection assesses the utility of each document and extracts useful supporting evidences; 3) the final answer refinement integrates the initial response and collected evidences to produce the final, refined this http URL conduct experiments across five open-source LLMs and four datasets, demonstrating that VeriCite can significantly improve citation quality while maintaining the correctness of the answers.

Filed under: Data Files, Journal Articles, Libraries, Management and Leadership, News, Patrons and Users, Roundup