Qing Li

Yufeng Wu, Qing Li, Elise van den Hoven et al.

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly integrated into photo applications on personal devices, making editing photographs easier than ever while potentially influencing the memories they represent. This study explores how and why people use GenAI to edit personal photos and how this shapes their remembering experience. We conducted a two-phase qualitative study with 12 participants: a photo editing session using a GenAI tool guided by the Remembering Experience (RX) dimensions, followed by semi-structured interviews where participants reflected on the editing process and results. Findings show that participants prioritised felt memory over factual accuracy. For different photo elements, environments were modified easily, however, editing was deemed unacceptable if it touched upon a person's identity. Editing processes brought positive and negative impacts, and itself also became a remembering experience. We further discuss potential benefits and risks of GenAI editing for remembering purposes and propose design implications for responsible GenAI.

Xintong Zhang, Xiaowen Zhang, Jongrong Wu et al.

Adaptive multimodal reasoning has emerged as a promising frontier in Vision-Language Models (VLMs), aiming to dynamically modulate between tool-augmented visual reasoning and text reasoning to enhance both effectiveness and efficiency. However, existing evaluations rely on static difficulty labels and simplistic metrics, which fail to capture the dynamic nature of difficulty relative to varying model capacities. Consequently, they obscure the distinction between adaptive mode selection and general performance while neglecting fine-grained process analyses. In this paper, we propose AdaptMMBench, a comprehensive benchmark for adaptive multimodal reasoning across five domains: real-world, OCR, GUI, knowledge, and math, encompassing both direct perception and complex reasoning tasks. AdaptMMBench utilizes a Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) metric to evaluate the selection rationality of different reasoning modes, isolating this meta-cognition ability by dynamically identifying task difficulties based on models' capability boundaries. Moreover, AdaptMMBench facilitates multi-dimensional process evaluation across key step coverage, tool effectiveness, and computational efficiency. Our evaluation reveals that while adaptive mode selection scales with model capacity, it notably decouples from final accuracy. Conversely, key step coverage aligns with performance, though tool effectiveness remains highly inconsistent across model architectures.