跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+1新增论文
+1其中 AI 相关
+0已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-13 07:07 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-13 06:39各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-12 09:38 — 2026-11-13 09:38(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-13 07:07最近发现新增版本:2026-11-13 06:39库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-11 08:00

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

21,676 已收录论文18,324 AI 相关6,056 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-13 07:05(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.11325

Linking Event-sequence Data Claims to Analytic Provenance in Chatbots: Technique and Evaluation

Po-Ming Law, Jianheng Ouyang, Nguyen-Truong Thinh, Weizhi Li, Arpit Narechania

原文摘要

Chatbots are increasingly used to analyze temporal event sequences of which website clickstreams are among the most common. Explanations are essential for understanding claims about event-sequence data. However, existing systems often require programming expertise to interpret these explanations and fail to explain the data processes underlying the data claims. We introduce a technique for linking a data claim to its analytic provenance (i.e., the analytic steps and results that produced it). It has two components: a reference table that records analytic steps and results in addressable cells, and a citation format that binds each claim to one or more cells. To operationalize this technique for clickstream analysis, we curated a set of analytic operations for clickstream analysis, organized them through a pivot-table abstraction, and developed tools that an AI agent can invoke to create a reference table and assemble a natural language response with cited data claims. To evaluate how citations affect users' assessment of data claims, we conducted two crowdsourced experiments with 90 participants each. The experiments showed that participants perceived correct data claims to be more accurate with citations when compared with no explanations, and that they perceived incorrect data claims to be less accurate with citations when compared with code and no explanations.

cs.HC