arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.05552

An Agent Model Abstraction for Human-AI Teaming Cognitive Coupling

Kolitha Kottagaha W. M·Jos A. C. Bokhorst·Ben Gaffinet·Christos Emmanouilidis
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Industrial environments increasingly rely on collaboration between humans and AI-enabled agents. Effective teamwork requires aligning how agents perceive situations, plan actions to pursue goals, and adapt to changing conditions, yet existing systems lack mechanisms for cross-agent cognitive processes coupling. This paper presents a conceptual cognitive agent model that formalises cognitive coupling through eight components: Input, Process, Output, State, Value, Memory, World Model, and Goal. The model abstracts how agents coordinate and co-regulate their cognitive cycles, providing a basis for analysing distributed cognition and designing cognitively interoperable human-AI systems.

Explore related subjects

cs.HCcs.AIcs.MA

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Kolitha Kottagaha W. M, Jos A. C. Bokhorst, Ben Gaffinet, Christos Emmanouilidis. 2026-09-03. An Agent Model Abstraction for Human-AI Teaming Cognitive Coupling. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.05552

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

Discover connections

cs.AI subjectcs.HC subjectcs.MA subject

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Unsupervised Partner Design Enables Robust Ad-hoc Teamwork

We introduce Unsupervised Partner Design (UPD), a population-free multi-agent reinforcement learning method for robust ad-hoc teamwork. UPD generates training partners on-the-fly and selects them adaptively based on a learnability criterion, removing the need for pre-trained partner populations or manual parameter tuning. We show that this simple mechanism enables effective partner diversity and can be extended to joint partner-environment selection when a procedural level generator is available. Across Level-Based Foraging, Overcooked-AI, and the Overcooked Generalisation Challenge, UPD consistently achieves strong performance compared to both population-based and population-free baselines. In a human-AI user study, agents trained with UPD achieve higher returns and are rated as more adaptive, more human-like, and less frustrating than all evaluated baseline methods.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Graphionale: How Graph Visualizations of LLM Rationales Affect Human Decision Making

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly equipped with augmented reasoning capabilities to generate rationales that support human decision-making. Yet these text-dense rationales often impose substantial cognitive burdens. Building on a formative co-design study that identified user preferences for non-linear reasoning representations, we developed Graphionale as a testbed for empirically studying argument-map-style rationale visualization. This system transforms linear LLM rationales into interactive, multi-level graphs. It explicitly structures logical relationships (e.g., conclusions, premises, support, and objections), while further extracting entities and relations within each statement to construct condensed node-link representations. We conduct a large-scale online user study (N = 204) to examine when graphical rationales are more effective than textual ones, across varying task modality (verbal vs. visual reasoning), rationale format (textual vs. graphical), and question difficulty (easy vs. hard). Our results show that graphical rationales do not help uniformly: they improve trust calibration for verbal reasoning yet feel more cognitively demanding and less satisfying; for visual reasoning, they impair calibration yet feel more engaging and helpful. In each modality, the format that better supports calibrated decisions is not the one users prefer, highlighting that matching rationale format to task modality is key to effective AI explanation design. Our findings contribute empirical design knowledge about when and how graphical rationales support human decision making, and inform the next-generation reasoning-aware AI interfaces.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

MIVAIS: A Study Environment for Multi-Agent Mixed-Initiative Visual Analytics Applications

Mixed-initiative Visual Analytics (VA) systems empower human users by interleaving human intuition with software agents and their machine intelligence. However, the development and rigorous evaluation of such systems remain constrained by engineering overhead. Developers must, e.g., implement complex, low-level state synchronization to manage asynchronous agent behaviors, while researchers struggle to capture the multimodal provenance required to study and evaluate human-AI collaboration. We present MIVAIS, a dual-layered research platform designed to abstract the structural complexities of mixed-initiative VA. First, it contributes a computational Infrastructure that standardizes human-software agent interaction, state synchronization, and communication between the agents. Second, it provides a declarative Study Environment that automatically logs multimodal human-AI telemetry - including application/system state, screen capture, audio, and additional sensor data - enabling seamless, in-situ user studies and post-session analysis. We technically validate our infrastructure by replicating three state-of-the-art systems (Podium, Voyager 2, and ProactiveVA). Furthermore, we evaluate the framework's expressiveness and efficiency through expert case studies with HCI and VA researchers, demonstrating how MIVAIS effectively lowers the barrier to prototyping and evaluating intelligent, co-adaptive interfaces.

cs.HC↗