arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.26365

From Tasks to Turns: Measuring Human Labor Contributions in Human-Agent Joint Production

Abstract

In agent workflows, a brief human instruction can alter subsequent search, reasoning, and tool execution, yet final task outcomes rarely reveal the contribution of an individual instruction to human-agent joint production. We propose a Human Turn-level framework for measuring human contributions, using task quality and token usage to characterize the collaborative production outcomes associated with each human instruction. We compare continuations from adjacent checkpoints under matched models, budgets, and termination conditions, and assess stability through repeated measurements. Across four archived and simulated interaction settings, we conduct 29,124 comparisons between predicted and observed directions of quality and computational change at both Human Turn and session levels. On HumanBench, we obtain 506 valid comparisons across 85 real-user scenarios. Results show that quality and computational changes associated with human guidance depend on task conditions. Expert-style and ordinary-style guidance differ in information provision, correction, and repetition. Even when task quality after continuation is identical, remaining computational demands can differ substantially across checkpoints. Our framework advances the measurement of human labor contributions from tasks and sessions to individual turns, providing a repeatable, fine-grained foundation for studying human contributions and their allocation in human-agent joint production.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Likai Wang, Dezhao Su, Jing Hu, Yunyun Wan, Jingdi Lei, Xinhai Li. 2026-10-19. From Tasks to Turns: Measuring Human Labor Contributions in Human-Agent Joint Production. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.26365

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

FlexMind: Supporting Deeper Creative Thinking with LLMs

Expert ideation requires more than generating ideas. People must articulate trade-offs, develop mitigations, and compare parallel directions, yet this reasoning process is cognitively demanding. Existing ideation tools fall short by either focusing only on expanding or organizing the idea space, or by offering evaluations without supporting mitigation generation and continued reasoning over newly introduced trade-offs. We present FlexMind, an AI-augmented system that proactively scaffolds multi-threaded trade-off-mitigation chains within a structured workspace. FlexMind helps users surface concrete trade-offs, generate actionable mitigations, and navigate and expand multiple idea branches. In a controlled study (n=20), FlexMind supported deeper exploration without sacrificing breadth and produced higher-quality ideas, as judged by domain experts, compared to a baseline. A case study with six experts (n=6) further reveals how FlexMind supports idea analysis while helping uncover new solutions. These results inform implications for enhancing human-AI co-creation.

cs.HC↗

ZORO: Active Controls to Support Rule Following in Vibe Coding

Rules files (e.g., AGENTS$.$md, CLAUDE$.$md) are the primary mechanism for human-agent alignment when developers vibe code. However, they remain passive: it is not immediately apparent when rules are being used or followed, or how to improve them. To transform rules from passive text into active controls, we introduce ZORO, an interactive interface that integrates directly with a coding agent and anchors rules to every step of the coding process. After an agent generates an initial plan, ZORO enriches the plan with rules, enforces the rules during implementation by requiring the agent prove that each rule was followed, and allows users to provide in-situ feedback when they are unsatisfied with a rule application to evolve the ruleset. A technical evaluation shows that coding agents follow rules more with ZORO than without. A user study demonstrates a change in people's behavior and cognitive strategies when rules are at the forefront of vibe coding. We discuss how making rules active in agentic systems unlocks broader opportunities for human-agent alignment in coding settings and beyond.

cs.HC↗

Calibrating LLM Judges for Human and AI Conversations

Measuring how successful a conversation is remains difficult, even for humans judging spoken dialogue. We evaluate state-of-the-art LLMs as pointwise and pairwise judges of conversational success on CANDOR, finding pointwise scoring correlates moderately with human ratings, while pairwise comparison suffers from long transcripts and positional bias. Since this leaves judge scores incomparable across models, we propose a small anchor set and a calibration function that calibrates any judge onto a shared, interpretable scale. We further release the Voice Arena Goal Dataset (VA), 200 task-oriented human-AI and human-agent conversations with pairwise annotations, revealing a substantial gap between current judges and human-level discrimination. Using VA, we test whether CANDOR-fitted calibration transfers to human-AI conversations, finding it brings judges onto a shared scale despite never observing VA during fitting.

cs.HC↗