arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2608.29209

Toward Cultural Alignment: Human-Centered Evaluation of Multimodal AI Stories Across Five African Communities

Abstract

In this paper, we examine how well AI-generated multimodal stories align with the lived practices, relationships, language, values, and visual expectations of the communities they represent. We conduct a community-grounded mixed-methods evaluation with 19 culture representatives across five African communities, combining quantitative annotations with qualitative focus group discussions. We find that cultural alignment depends not simply on recognizable cultural markers, but on how those markers fit social, linguistic, procedural, and visual context. From these evaluations, we develop a taxonomy of cultural alignment comprising five broader cultural marker categories and eight recurring mechanisms of misalignment. We additionally evaluate five multimodal LLM judges to examine whether automated evaluation can approximate community-grounded judgments at scale. Judge reliability and score calibration vary substantially across communities, with no single judge performing consistently across all five settings. These findings motivate community-calibrated evaluation pipelines in which automated judges are validated against community judgments to determine where they can be trusted and where human review remains necessary.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Millicent Ochieng, Felermino D. M. A. Ali, Elizabeth A. Ankrah, Najeeb Gambo Abdulhamid, Migisha Boyd, Stephanie Nyairo, Mercy Muchai, Samuel Chege Maina, Aditya Vashistha, Anja Thieme, Jacki O'Neill. 2026-08-29. Toward Cultural Alignment: Human-Centered Evaluation of Multimodal AI Stories Across Five African Communities. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.29209

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Pearmut: Human Evaluation of Translation Made Trivial

Human evaluation is the gold standard for multilingual NLP, but is often skipped in practice and substituted with automatic metrics because it is notoriously complex and slow to set up with existing tools with substantial engineering and operational overhead. We introduce Pearmut, a lightweight yet feature-rich platform that makes end-to-end human evaluation as easy to run as automatic evaluation. Pearmut removes common entry barriers and provides support for evaluating multilingual tasks, with a particular focus on machine translation. The platform implements standard evaluation protocols, including DA, ESA, and MQM, and is extensible to support new protocols. It features document-level context, absolute and contrastive evaluation, attention checks, ESAAI pre-annotations and both static and dynamic assignment strategies. Pearmut enables reliable human evaluation to become a practical, routine component of model development and diagnosis rather than an occasional effort.

cs.CL

Anamnesis: An Open-Source Platform for Large-Scale Backstory-Conditioned Survey Simulation

We present Anamnesis, an interactive system for demographically controllable survey simulation using large language models. Open-source and designed for non-technical users/researchers, Anamnesis enables the prototyping and stress-testing of survey instruments on virtual populations rather than real human subjects. The platform operationalizes the recently introduced Anthology and Alterity frameworks, which use structured narrative backstories to condition model responses, within a unified web interface. It supports open-ended generation, probabilistic demographic resampling, and multimodal (image and audio) surveys. We evaluate the system through two case studies: (1) replicating segments of Pew Research Center's American Trends Panel (ATP) on political typology and biomedical issues and (2) emulating human preference in the New Yorker Caption Contest. In both cases, Anamnesis produces opinion distributions that more closely match real-world survey data than standard persona-prompting baselines, offering a transparent, reproducible, and open-source alternative to proprietary simulation services.

cs.CL

Designing Proactive Thought Partners for Writing

Writing involves diverse cognitive activities, from ideation to revision, and writers' needs vary across individuals and moments. Proactive AI promises to provide the right support at the right time, yet existing proactive tools largely focus on generic textual assistance, such as autocomplete. This paper studies the design space of proactive thought partners: AI agents that proactively offer customizable, higher-level cognitive support during writing. We instantiated this concept in a technology probe and deployed it with 16 participants for one week. The probe allows users to create partners by configuring their roles and proactivity. As users write, relevant partners take the initiative at appropriate moments to offer suggestions. Our findings show that participants configured proactive support through prospective planning, used suggestions for both idea generation and self-monitoring, and valued lightweight visual representations alongside non-directive rhetorical framing for non-intrusive interventions. We derive implications for designing proactive writing assistants around customization, timing, engagement, and representation.

cs.HC