Leijie Wang

Chirag Shah, Ryen W. White, Reid Andersen et al.

Log data can reveal valuable information about how users interact with Web search services, what they want, and how satisfied they are. However, analyzing user intents in log data is not easy, especially for emerging forms of Web search such as AI-driven chat. To understand user intents from log data, we need a way to label them with meaningful categories that capture their diversity and dynamics. Existing methods rely on manual or machine-learned labeling, which are either expensive or inflexible for large and dynamic datasets. We propose a novel solution using large language models (LLMs), which can generate rich and relevant concepts, descriptions, and examples for user intents. However, using LLMs to generate a user intent taxonomy and apply it for log analysis can be problematic for two main reasons: (1) such a taxonomy is not externally validated; and (2) there may be an undesirable feedback loop. To address this, we propose a new methodology with human experts and assessors to verify the quality of the LLM-generated taxonomy. We also present an end-to-end pipeline that uses an LLM with human-in-the-loop to produce, refine, and apply labels for user intent analysis in log data. We demonstrate its effectiveness by uncovering new insights into user intents from search and chat logs from the Microsoft Bing commercial search engine. The proposed work's novelty stems from the method for generating purpose-driven user intent taxonomies with strong validation. This method not only helps remove methodological and practical bottlenecks from intent-focused research, but also provides a new framework for generating, validating, and applying other kinds of taxonomies in a scalable and adaptable way with reasonable human effort.

Leijie Wang, Otilia Stretcu, Wei Qiao et al.

From content moderation to content curation, applications requiring vision classifiers for visual concepts are rapidly expanding. Existing human-in-the-loop approaches typically assume users begin with a clear, stable concept understanding to be able to provide high-quality supervision. In reality, users often start with a vague idea and must iteratively refine it through "concept deliberation", a practice we uncovered through structured interviews with content moderation experts. We operationalize the common strategies in deliberation used by real content moderators into a human-in-the-loop framework called "Agile Deliberation" that explicitly supports evolving and subjective concepts. The system supports users in defining the concept for themselves by exposing them to borderline cases. The system does this with two deliberation stages: (1) concept scoping, which decomposes the initial concept into a structured hierarchy of sub-concepts, and (2) concept iteration, which surfaces semantically borderline examples for user reflection and feedback to iteratively align an image classifier with the user's evolving intent. Since concept deliberation is inherently subjective and interactive, we painstakingly evaluate the framework through 18 user sessions, each 1.5h long, rather than standard benchmarking datasets. We find that Agile Deliberation achieves 7.5% higher F1 scores than automated decomposition baselines and more than 3% higher than manual deliberation, while participants reported clearer conceptual understanding and lower cognitive effort.

Tanjal Shukla, K. J. Kevin Feng, Leijie Wang et al.

Despite coding agents' advances in handling increasingly complex tasks, their continued tendency to introduce unintended edits, subtle bugs, and scope drift that slip past code review means developers must still decide how much autonomy to grant them. However, existing approaches for setting an agent's level of autonomy, such as static permission settings or instruction files, cannot account for how developers' preferences for agent autonomy can shift across tasks and over time. We conducted a formative survey with 21 software engineers who use coding agents and found that they experience frustration with calibrating autonomy and have evolving preferences for level of oversight. Building on these insights, we present Hedwig, a CLI coding agent that dynamically adjusts its autonomy level based on developer-agent interactions across sessions. Rather than operating on a global, fixed autonomy configuration, Hedwig learns an evolving set of behavioral guidelines from developer decisions and feedback, reducing friction on work for which the agent has earned trust, while tightening oversight when the agent operates outside familiar territory. Hedwig demonstrates the potential of a new paradigm where agents intelligently adapt their level of autonomy based on user trust through active, longitudinal collaboration.

Siddharth Suri, Scott Counts, Leijie Wang et al.

Until recently, search engines were the predominant method for people to access online information. The recent emergence of large language models (LLMs) has given machines new capabilities such as the ability to generate new digital artifacts like text, images, code etc., resulting in a new tool, a generative search engine, which combines the capabilities of LLMs with a traditional search engine. Through the empirical analysis of Bing Copilot (Bing Chat), one of the first publicly available generative search engines, we analyze the types and complexity of tasks that people use Bing Copilot for compared to Bing Search. Findings indicate that people use the generative search engine for more knowledge work tasks that are higher in cognitive complexity than were commonly done with a traditional search engine.