This paper describes our research on AI agents embodied in visual, virtual or physical forms, enabling them to interact with both users and their environments. These agents, which include virtual avatars, wearable devices, and robots, are designed to perceive, learn and act within their surroundings, which makes them more similar to how humans learn and interact with the environments as compared to disembodied agents. We propose that the development of world models is central to reasoning and planning of embodied AI agents, allowing these agents to understand and predict their environment, to understand user intentions and social contexts, thereby enhancing their ability to perform complex tasks autonomously. World modeling encompasses the integration of multimodal perception, planning through reasoning for action and control, and memory to create a comprehensive understanding of the physical world. Beyond the physical world, we also propose to learn the mental world model of users to enable better human-agent collaboration.
Text analytics has traditionally required specialized knowledge in Natural Language Processing (NLP) or text analysis, which presents a barrier for entry-level analysts. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have changed the landscape of NLP by enabling more accessible and automated text analysis (e.g., topic detection, summarization, information extraction, etc.). We introduce VIDEE, a system that supports entry-level data analysts to conduct advanced text analytics with intelligent agents. VIDEE instantiates a human-agent collaroration workflow consisting of three stages: (1) Decomposition, which incorporates a human-in-the-loop Monte-Carlo Tree Search algorithm to support generative reasoning with human feedback, (2) Execution, which generates an executable text analytics pipeline, and (3) Evaluation, which integrates LLM-based evaluation and visualizations to support user validation of execution results. We conduct two quantitative experiments to evaluate VIDEE's effectiveness and analyze common agent errors. A user study involving participants with varying levels of NLP and text analytics experience -- from none to expert -- demonstrates the system's usability and reveals distinct user behavior patterns. The findings identify design implications for human-agent collaboration, validate the practical utility of VIDEE for non-expert users, and inform future improvements to intelligent text analytics systems.
As AI tools proliferate across domains, from chatbots and copilots to emerging agents, they increasingly support professional knowledge work. Yet despite their growing capabilities, these systems remain fragmented: they assist with isolated tasks but lack the architectural scaffolding for sustained, adaptive collaboration. We propose a layered framework for human-agent systems that integrates three interdependent dimensions: interaction, process, and infrastructure. Crucially, our architecture elevates process to a primary focus by making it explicit, inspectable, and adaptable, enabling humans and agents to align with evolving goals and coordinate over time. This model clarifies limitations of current tools, unifies emerging system design approaches, and reveals new opportunities for researchers and AI system builders. By grounding intelligent behavior in structured collaboration, we reimagine human-agent collaboration not as task-specific augmentation, but as a form of coherent and aligned system for real-world work.
Autonomous graphical user interface (GUI) agents powered by multimodal large language models have shown great promise. However, a critical yet underexplored issue persists: over-execution, where the agent executes tasks in a fully autonomous way, without adequate assessment of its action confidence to compromise an adaptive human-agent collaboration. This poses substantial risks in complex scenarios, such as those involving ambiguous user instructions, unexpected interruptions, and environmental hijacks. To address the issue, we introduce OS-Kairos, an adaptive GUI agent capable of predicting confidence levels at each interaction step and efficiently deciding whether to act autonomously or seek human intervention. OS-Kairos is developed through two key mechanisms: (i) collaborative probing that annotates confidence scores at each interaction step; (ii) confidence-driven interaction that leverages these confidence scores to elicit the ability of adaptive interaction. Experimental results show that OS-Kairos substantially outperforms existing models on our curated dataset featuring complex scenarios, as well as on established benchmarks such as AITZ and Meta-GUI, with 24.59\%$\sim$87.29\% improvements in task success rate. OS-Kairos facilitates an adaptive human-agent collaboration, prioritizing effectiveness, generality, scalability, and efficiency for real-world GUI interaction. The dataset and codes are available at https://github.com/Wuzheng02/OS-Kairos.
Multi-agent autonomous systems (MAS) are better at addressing challenges that spans across multiple domains than singular autonomous agents. This holds true within the field of software engineering (SE) as well. The state-of-the-art research on MAS within SE focuses on integrating LLMs at the core of autonomous agents to create LLM-based multi-agent autonomous (LMA) systems. However, the introduction of LMA systems into SE brings a plethora of challenges. One of the major challenges is the strategic allocation of tasks between humans and the LMA system in a trustworthy manner. To address this challenge, a RACI-based framework is proposed in this work in progress article, along with implementation guidelines and an example implementation of the framework. The proposed framework can facilitate efficient collaboration, ensure accountability, and mitigate potential risks associated with LLM-driven automation while aligning with the Trustworthy AI guidelines. The future steps for this work delineating the planned empirical validation method are also presented.
Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have sparked growing interest in building fully autonomous agents. However, fully autonomous LLM-based agents still face significant challenges, including limited reliability due to hallucinations, difficulty in handling complex tasks, and substantial safety and ethical risks, all of which limit their feasibility and trustworthiness in real-world applications. To overcome these limitations, LLM-based human-agent systems (LLM-HAS) incorporate human-provided information, feedback, or control into the agent system to enhance system performance, reliability and safety. This paper provides the first comprehensive and structured survey of LLM-HAS. It clarifies fundamental concepts, systematically presents core components shaping these systems, including environment & profiling, human feedback, interaction types, orchestration and communication, explores emerging applications, and discusses unique challenges and opportunities. By consolidating current knowledge and offering a structured overview, we aim to foster further research and innovation in this rapidly evolving interdisciplinary field. Paper lists and resources are available at https://github.com/HenryPengZou/Awesome-LLM-Based-Human-Agent-Systems.
AI practitioners increasingly use large language model (LLM) agents in compound AI systems to solve complex reasoning tasks, these agent executions often fail to meet human standards, leading to errors that compromise the system's overall performance. Addressing these failures through human intervention is challenging due to the agents' opaque reasoning processes, misalignment with human expectations, the complexity of agent dependencies, and the high cost of manual inspection. This paper thus introduces a human-centered evaluation framework for Verifying LLM Agent failures (VeriLA), which systematically assesses agent failures to reduce human effort and make these agent failures interpretable to humans. The framework first defines clear expectations of each agent by curating human-designed agent criteria. Then, it develops a human-aligned agent verifier module, trained with human gold standards, to assess each agent's execution output. This approach enables granular evaluation of each agent's performance by revealing failures from a human standard, offering clear guidelines for revision, and reducing human cognitive load. Our case study results show that VeriLA is both interpretable and efficient in helping practitioners interact more effectively with the system. By upholding accountability in human-agent collaboration, VeriLA paves the way for more trustworthy and human-aligned compound AI systems.
Despite its ubiquity in the workforce, spreadsheet programming remains challenging as programmers need both spreadsheet-specific knowledge (e.g., APIs to write formulas) and problem-solving skills to create complex spreadsheets. Large language models (LLMs) can help automate aspects of this process, and recent advances in planning and reasoning have enabled language agents, which dynamically plan, use tools, and take iterative actions to complete complex tasks. These agents observe, plan, and act, making them well-suited to scaffold spreadsheet programming by following expert processes. We present TableTalk, a language agent that helps programmers build spreadsheets conversationally. Its design reifies three design principles -- scaffolding, flexibility, and incrementality -- which we derived from two studies of seven programmers and 62 Excel templates. TableTalk structures spreadsheet development by generating step-by-step plans and suggesting three next steps users can choose from. It also integrates tools that enable incremental spreadsheet construction. A user study with 20 programmers shows that TableTalk produces spreadsheets 2.3 times more likely to be preferred over a baseline agent, while reducing cognitive load and time spent reasoning about spreadsheet actions by 12.6%. TableTalk's approach has implications for human-agent collaboration. This includes providing persistent direct manipulation interfaces for stopping or undoing agent actions, while ensuring that such interfaces for accepting actions can be deactivated.
Recent advancements in language models (LMs) have sparked growing interest in developing LM agents. While fully autonomous agents could excel in many scenarios, numerous use cases inherently require them to collaborate with humans due to humans' latent preferences, domain expertise, or need for control. To facilitate the study of human-agent collaboration, we present Collaborative Gym (Co-Gym), a general framework enabling asynchronous, tripartite interaction among agents, humans, and task environments. We instantiate Co-Gym with three representative tasks in both simulated and real-world conditions, and propose an evaluation framework that assesses both the collaboration outcomes and processes. Our findings reveal that collaborative agents consistently outperform their fully autonomous counterparts in task performance within those delivered cases, achieving win rates of 86% in Travel Planning, 74% in Tabular Analysis, and 66% in Related Work when evaluated by real users. However, our study also highlights significant challenges in developing collaborative agents, requiring advancements in core aspects of intelligence -- communication capabilities, situational awareness, and balancing autonomy and human control.
Agents powered by large language models have shown remarkable abilities in solving complex tasks. However, most agent systems remain reactive, limiting their effectiveness in scenarios requiring foresight and autonomous decision-making. In this paper, we tackle the challenge of developing proactive agents capable of anticipating and initiating tasks without explicit human instructions. We propose a novel data-driven approach for this problem. Firstly, we collect real-world human activities to generate proactive task predictions. These predictions are then labeled by human annotators as either accepted or rejected. The labeled data is used to train a reward model that simulates human judgment and serves as an automatic evaluator of the proactiveness of LLM agents. Building on this, we develop a comprehensive data generation pipeline to create a diverse dataset, ProactiveBench, containing 6,790 events. Finally, we demonstrate that fine-tuning models with the proposed ProactiveBench can significantly elicit the proactiveness of LLM agents. Experimental results show that our fine-tuned model achieves an F1-Score of 66.47% in proactively offering assistance, outperforming all open-source and close-source models. These results highlight the potential of our method in creating more proactive and effective agent systems, paving the way for future advancements in human-agent collaboration.
Goal recognition (GR) involves inferring an agent's unobserved goal from a sequence of observations. This is a critical problem in AI with diverse applications. Traditionally, GR has been addressed using 'inference to the best explanation' or abduction, where hypotheses about the agent's goals are generated as the most plausible explanations for observed behavior. Alternatively, some approaches enhance interpretability by ensuring that an agent's behavior aligns with an observer's expectations or by making the reasoning behind decisions more transparent. In this work, we tackle a different challenge: explaining the GR process in a way that is comprehensible to humans. We introduce and evaluate an explainable model for goal recognition (GR) agents, grounded in the theoretical framework and cognitive processes underlying human behavior explanation. Drawing on insights from two human-agent studies, we propose a conceptual framework for human-centered explanations of GR. Using this framework, we develop the eXplainable Goal Recognition (XGR) model, which generates explanations for both why and why not questions. We evaluate the model computationally across eight GR benchmarks and through three user studies. The first study assesses the efficiency of generating human-like explanations within the Sokoban game domain, the second examines perceived explainability in the same domain, and the third evaluates the model's effectiveness in aiding decision-making in illegal fishing detection. Results demonstrate that the XGR model significantly enhances user understanding, trust, and decision-making compared to baseline models, underscoring its potential to improve human-agent collaboration.
Agents that assist people need to have well-initialized policies that can adapt quickly to align with their partners' reward functions. Initializing policies to maximize performance with unknown partners can be achieved by bootstrapping nonlinear models using imitation learning over large, offline datasets. Such policies can require prohibitive computation to fine-tune in-situ and therefore may miss critical run-time information about a partner's reward function as expressed through their immediate behavior. In contrast, online logistic regression using low-capacity models performs rapid inference and fine-tuning updates and thus can make effective use of immediate in-task behavior for reward function alignment. However, these low-capacity models cannot be bootstrapped as effectively by offline datasets and thus have poor initializations. We propose BLR-HAC, Bootstrapped Logistic Regression for Human Agent Collaboration, which bootstraps large nonlinear models to learn the parameters of a low-capacity model which then uses online logistic regression for updates during collaboration. We test BLR-HAC in a simulated surface rearrangement task and demonstrate that it achieves higher zero-shot accuracy than shallow methods and takes far less computation to adapt online while still achieving similar performance to fine-tuned, large nonlinear models. For code, please see our project page https://sites.google.com/view/blr-hac.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as integral tools for reasoning, planning, and decision-making, drawing upon their extensive world knowledge and proficiency in language-related tasks. LLMs thus hold tremendous potential for natural language interaction within multi-agent systems to foster cooperation. However, LLM agents tend to over-report and comply with any instruction, which may result in information redundancy and confusion in multi-agent cooperation. Inspired by human organizations, this paper introduces a framework that imposes prompt-based organization structures on LLM agents to mitigate these problems. Through a series of experiments with embodied LLM agents and human-agent collaboration, our results highlight the impact of designated leadership on team efficiency, shedding light on the leadership qualities displayed by LLM agents and their spontaneous cooperative behaviors. Further, we harness the potential of LLMs to propose enhanced organizational prompts, via a Criticize-Reflect process, resulting in novel organization structures that reduce communication costs and enhance team efficiency.
In recent developments within the research community, the integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) in creating fully autonomous agents has garnered significant interest. Despite this, LLM-based agents frequently demonstrate notable shortcomings in adjusting to dynamic environments and fully grasping human needs. In this work, we introduce the problem of LLM-based human-agent collaboration for complex task-solving, exploring their synergistic potential. In addition, we propose a Reinforcement Learning-based Human-Agent Collaboration method, ReHAC. This approach includes a policy model designed to determine the most opportune stages for human intervention within the task-solving process. We construct a human-agent collaboration dataset to train this policy model in an offline reinforcement learning environment. Our validation tests confirm the model's effectiveness. The results demonstrate that the synergistic efforts of humans and LLM-based agents significantly improve performance in complex tasks, primarily through well-planned, limited human intervention. Datasets and code are available at: https://github.com/XueyangFeng/ReHAC.
Existing game AI research mainly focuses on enhancing agents' abilities to win games, but this does not inherently make humans have a better experience when collaborating with these agents. For example, agents may dominate the collaboration and exhibit unintended or detrimental behaviors, leading to poor experiences for their human partners. In other words, most game AI agents are modeled in a "self-centered" manner. In this paper, we propose a "human-centered" modeling scheme for collaborative agents that aims to enhance the experience of humans. Specifically, we model the experience of humans as the goals they expect to achieve during the task. We expect that agents should learn to enhance the extent to which humans achieve these goals while maintaining agents' original abilities (e.g., winning games). To achieve this, we propose the Reinforcement Learning from Human Gain (RLHG) approach. The RLHG approach introduces a "baseline", which corresponds to the extent to which humans primitively achieve their goals, and encourages agents to learn behaviors that can effectively enhance humans in achieving their goals better. We evaluate the RLHG agent in the popular Multi-player Online Battle Arena (MOBA) game, Honor of Kings, by conducting real-world human-agent tests. Both objective performance and subjective preference results show that the RLHG agent provides participants better gaming experience.
VoxML is a modeling language used to map natural language expressions into real-time visualizations using commonsense semantic knowledge of objects and events. Its utility has been demonstrated in embodied simulation environments and in agent-object interactions in situated multimodal human-agent collaboration and communication. It introduces the notion of object affordance (both Gibsonian and Telic) from HRI and robotics, as well as the concept of habitat (an object's context of use) for interactions between a rational agent and an object. This paper aims to specify VoxML as an annotation language in general abstract terms. It then shows how it works on annotating linguistic data that express visually perceptible human-object interactions. The annotation structures thus generated will be interpreted against the enriched minimal model created by VoxML as a modeling language while supporting the modeling purposes of VoxML linguistically.
MOBA games, e.g., Dota2 and Honor of Kings, have been actively used as the testbed for the recent AI research on games, and various AI systems have been developed at the human level so far. However, these AI systems mainly focus on how to compete with humans, less on exploring how to collaborate with humans. To this end, this paper makes the first attempt to investigate human-agent collaboration in MOBA games. In this paper, we propose to enable humans and agents to collaborate through explicit communication by designing an efficient and interpretable Meta-Command Communication-based framework, dubbed MCC, for accomplishing effective human-agent collaboration in MOBA games. The MCC framework consists of two pivotal modules: 1) an interpretable communication protocol, i.e., the Meta-Command, to bridge the communication gap between humans and agents; 2) a meta-command value estimator, i.e., the Meta-Command Selector, to select a valuable meta-command for each agent to achieve effective human-agent collaboration. Experimental results in Honor of Kings demonstrate that MCC agents can collaborate reasonably well with human teammates and even generalize to collaborate with different levels and numbers of human teammates. Videos are available at https://sites.google.com/view/mcc-demo.
Aiming to ensure chatbot quality by predicting chatbot failure and enabling human-agent collaboration, Machine-Human Chatting Handoff (MHCH) has attracted lots of attention from both industry and academia in recent years. However, most existing methods mainly focus on the dialogue context or assist with global satisfaction prediction based on multi-task learning, which ignore the grounded relationships among the causal variables, like the user state and labor cost. These variables are significantly associated with handoff decisions, resulting in prediction bias and cost increasement. Therefore, we propose Causal-Enhance Module (CEM) by establishing the causal graph of MHCH based on these two variables, which is a simple yet effective module and can be easy to plug into the existing MHCH methods. For the impact of users, we use the user state to correct the prediction bias according to the causal relationship of multi-task. For the labor cost, we train an auxiliary cost simulator to calculate unbiased labor cost through counterfactual learning so that a model becomes cost-aware. Extensive experiments conducted on four real-world benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of CEM in generally improving the performance of existing MHCH methods without any elaborated model crafting.
Advances in multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) enable sequential decision making for a range of exciting multi-agent applications such as cooperative AI and autonomous driving. Explaining agent decisions is crucial for improving system transparency, increasing user satisfaction, and facilitating human-agent collaboration. However, existing works on explainable reinforcement learning mostly focus on the single-agent setting and are not suitable for addressing challenges posed by multi-agent environments. We present novel methods to generate two types of policy explanations for MARL: (i) policy summarization about the agent cooperation and task sequence, and (ii) language explanations to answer queries about agent behavior. Experimental results on three MARL domains demonstrate the scalability of our methods. A user study shows that the generated explanations significantly improve user performance and increase subjective ratings on metrics such as user satisfaction.
With Artificial Intelligence on the rise, human interaction with autonomous agents becomes more frequent. Effective human-agent collaboration requires users to understand the agent's behavior, as failing to do so may cause reduced productivity, misuse or frustration. Agent strategy summarization methods are used to describe the strategy of an agent to its destined user through demonstration. A summary's objective is to maximize the user's understanding of the agent's aptitude by showcasing its behaviour in a selected set of world states. While shown to be useful, we show that current methods are limited when tasked with comparing between agents, as each summary is independently generated for a specific agent. In this paper, we propose a novel method for generating dependent and contrastive summaries that emphasize the differences between agent policies by identifying states in which the agents disagree on the best course of action. We conduct user studies to assess the usefulness of disagreement-based summaries for identifying superior agents and conveying agent differences. Results show disagreement-based summaries lead to improved user performance compared to summaries generated using HIGHLIGHTS, a strategy summarization algorithm which generates summaries for each agent independently.