2026
Can You Make It Sound Like You? Post-Editing LLM-Generated Text for Personal Style
Connor Baumler, Calvin Bao, Huy Nghiem, Xinchen Yang, Marine Carpuat, and Hal Daumé III
ACL 2026
[Paper] [Repo] [arXiv] [Abstract]
Despite the growing use of large language models (LLMs) for writing tasks, users may hesitate to rely on LLMs when personal style is important. Post-editing LLM-generated drafts or translations is a common collaborative writing strategy, but it remains unclear whether users can effectively reshape LLM-generated text to reflect their personal style. We conduct a pre-registered online study (n=81) in which participants post-edit LLM-generated drafts for writing tasks where personal style matters to them. Using embedding-based style similarity metrics, we find that post-editing increases stylistic similarity to participants' unassisted writing and reduces similarity to fully LLM-generated output. However, post-edited text still remains stylistically closer in style to LLM text than to participants' unassisted control text, and it exhibits reduced stylistic diversity compared to unassisted human text. We find a gap between perceived stylistic authenticity and model-measured stylistic similarity, with post-edited text often perceived as representative of participants' personal style despite remaining detectable LLM stylistic traces.
When Stereotypes GTG: The Impact of Predictive Text Suggestions on Gender Bias in Human-AI Co-Writing
Connor Baumler and Hal Daumé III
CHI 2026
[Paper] [Repo] [arXiv] [ACM] [Abstract]
AI-based systems such as language models have been shown to replicate and even amplify social biases reflected in their training data. Among other questionable behaviors, this can lead to AI-generated text–and text suggestions–that contain normatively inappropriate stereotypical associations. Little is known, however, about how this behavior impacts the writing produced by people using these systems. We address this gap by measuring how much impact stereotypes or anti-stereotypes in English single-word LM predictive text suggestions have on the stories that people write using those tools in a co-writing scenario. We find that (n = 414), LM suggestions that challenge stereotypes sometimes lead to a significantly increased rate of anti-stereotypical co-written stories. However, despite this increased rate of anti-stereotypical stories, pro-stereotypical narratives still dominated the co-written stories, demonstrating that technical debiasing is only a partially effective strategy to alleviate harms from human-AI collaboration.
2025
Who's the Author? How Explanations Impact User Reliance in AI-Assisted Authorship Attribution
Calvin Bao, Connor Baumler, Hal Daumé III, and Marine Carpuat
EMNLP Findings 2025
[Paper] [ACL Anthology] [Abstract]
Despite growing interest in explainable NLP, it remains unclear how explanation strategies shape user behavior in tasks like authorship identification, where relevant textual features may be difficult for lay users to pinpoint. To support their analysis of text style, we consider two explanation types: example-based style rewrites and feature-based rationales, generated using a LLM-based pipeline. We measured how explanations impact user behavior in a controlled study (n=95) where participants completed authorship identification tasks with our types of assistance. While no explanation type improved overall task accuracy, fine-grained reliance patterns (Schemmer et al., 2023) revealed that rewrites supported appropriate reliance, whereas presenting both explanation types increased AI overreliance, minimizing participant self-reliance. We find that participants exhibiting better reliance behaviors had focused explanation needs, contrasting with the diffused preferences of those who overrelied on AI, or incorrectly self-relied. These findings highlight the need for adaptive explanation systems that tailor support based on specific user reliance behaviors.
On the Mutual Influence of Gender and Occupation in LLM Representations
Haozhe An, Connor Baumler, Abhilasha Sancheti, and Rachel Rudinger
ACL 2025
[Paper] [ACL Anthology] [Abstract]
We examine LLM representations of gender for first names in various occupational contexts to study how occupations and the gender perception of first names in LLMs influence each other mutually. We find that LLMs' first-name gender representations correlate with real-world gender statistics associated with the name, and are influenced by the co-occurrence of stereotypically feminine or masculine occupations. Additionally, we study the influence of first-name gender representations on LLMs in a downstream occupation prediction task and their potential as an internal metric to identify extrinsic model biases. While feminine first-name embeddings often raise the probabilities for female-dominated jobs (and vice versa for male-dominated jobs), reliably using these internal gender representations for bias detection remains challenging.
2024
The Impact of Explanations on Fairness in Human-AI Decision-Making: Protected vs Proxy Features
Connor Baumler, Navita Goyal, Tin Nguyen, and Hal Daumé III
IUI 2024
[Paper] [Repo] [arXiv] [ACM] [Abstract]
AI systems have been known to amplify biases in real-world data. Explanations may help human-AI teams address these biases for fairer decision-making. Typically, explanations focus on salient input features. If a model is biased against some protected group, explanations may include features that demonstrate this bias, but when biases are realized through proxy features, the relationship between this proxy feature and the protected one may be less clear to a human. In this work, we study the effect of the presence of protected and proxy features on participants’ perception of model fairness and their ability to improve demographic parity over an AI alone. Further, we examine how different treatments—explanations, model bias disclosure and proxy correlation disclosure—affect fairness perception and parity. We find that explanations help people detect direct but not indirect biases. Additionally, regardless of bias type, explanations tend to increase agreement with model biases. Disclosures can help mitigate this effect for indirect biases, improving both unfairness recognition and decision-making fairness. We hope that our findings can help guide further research into advancing explanations in support of fair human-AI decision-making.
2023
Which Examples Should be Multiply Annotated? Active Learning When Annotators May Disagree
Connor Baumler, Anna Sotnikova, and Hal Daumé III
ACL Findings 2023
[Paper] [Repo] [ACL Anthology] [Abstract]
Linguistic annotations, especially for controversial topics like hate speech detection, are frequently contested due to annotator backgrounds and positionalities. In such situations, preserving this disagreement through the machine learning pipeline can be important for downstream use cases. However, capturing disagreement can increase annotation time and expense. Fortunately, for many tasks, not all examples are equally controversial; we develop an active learning approach, Disagreement Aware Active Learning (DAAL) that concentrates annotations on examples where model entropy and annotator entropy are the most different. Because we cannot know the true entropy of annotations on unlabeled examples, we estimate a model that predicts annotator entropy trained using very few multiply-labeled examples. We find that traditional uncertainty-based active learning underperforms simple passive learning on tasks with high levels of disagreement, but that our active learning approach is able to successfully improve on passive and active baselines, reducing the number of annotations required by at least 24% on average across several datasets.
What Else Do I Need to Know? The Effect of Background Information on Users' Reliance on QA Systems
Navita Goyal, Eleftheria Briakou, Amanda Liu, Connor Baumler, Claire Bonial, Jeffrey Micher, Clare Voss, Marine Carpuat, and Hal Daumé III
EMNLP 2023
[Paper] [ACL Anthology] [Abstract]
NLP systems have shown impressive performance at answering questions by retrieving relevant context. However, with the increasingly large models, it is impossible and often undesirable to constrain models' knowledge or reasoning to only the retrieved context. This leads to a mismatch between the information that the models access to derive the answer and the information that is available to the user to assess the model predicted answer. In this work, we study how users interact with QA systems in the absence of sufficient information to assess their predictions. Further, we ask whether adding the requisite background helps mitigate users' over-reliance on predictions. Our study reveals that users rely on model predictions even in the absence of sufficient information needed to assess the model's correctness. Providing the relevant background, however, helps users better catch model errors, reducing over-reliance on incorrect predictions. On the flip side, background information also increases users' confidence in their accurate as well as inaccurate judgments. Our work highlights that supporting users' verification of QA predictions is an important, yet challenging, problem.
2022
Recognition of They/Them as Singular Personal Pronouns in Coreference Resolution
Connor Baumler and Rachel Rudinger
NAACL 2022
[Paper] [Repo] [ACL Anthology] [Abstract]
As using they/them as personal pronouns becomes increasingly common in English, it is important that coreference resolution systems work as well for individuals who use personal “they” as they do for those who use gendered personal pronouns. We introduce a new benchmark for coreference resolution systems which evaluates singular personal “they” recognition. Using these WinoNB schemas, we evaluate a number of publicly available coreference resolution systems and confirm their bias toward resolving “they” pronouns as plural.
Hybrid Semantics for Goal-Directed Natural Language Generation
Connor Baumler and Soumya Ray
ACL 2022
[Paper] [ACL Anthology] [Abstract]
We consider the problem of generating natural language given a communicative goal and a world description. We ask the question: is it possible to combine complementary meaning representations to scale a goal-directed NLG system without losing expressiveness? In particular, we consider using two meaning representations, one based on logical semantics and the other based on distributional semantics. We build upon an existing goal-directed generation system, S-STRUCT, which models sentence generation as planning in a Markov decision process. We develop a hybrid approach, which uses distributional semantics to quickly and imprecisely add the main elements of the sentence and then uses first-order logic based semantics to more slowly add the precise details. We find that our hybrid method allows S-STRUCT's generation to scale significantly better in early phases of generation and that the hybrid can often generate sentences with the same quality as S-STRUCT in substantially less time. However, we also observe and give insight into cases where the imprecision in distributional semantics leads to generation that is not as good as using pure logical semantics.
