arXiv subjects

Mattea Sim

Publications and source records attributed to Mattea Sim.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

AI-Enabled Human Memory Manipulation: Misleading AI-Generated Summaries Distort Human Memory

AI-generated summaries are increasingly used in high-stakes settings, like policing, despite considerable evidence that AI often generates misleading or inaccurate information. This research asked: do errors in AI-generated summaries distort human memory? To answer this question, we adopted two methodological approaches. First, we conducted an analysis of AI summary output, prompting large language models to generate summaries of videos. This analysis quantified how often AI summaries contain errors and the categories of these errors, revealing the kinds of misleading information that may distort human memory. Second, we conducted a human-subjects experiment to test the impact of misleading information in AI-generated summaries on human memory. Participants were first exposed to an event via watching a video of a car-pedestrian accident, and later read an AI-generated summary describing the video that either contained misleading or accurate information. Participants' memory for the original event was assessed in a memory recognition test. In the AI analysis, we found a high frequency of mistakes in AI summaries, and particularly frequent omissions of critical details. For instance, the majority of summaries omitted the most central event of the video, a critical error which is likely to be impactful. We also observed a strong effect of AI misinformation on human memory. People who read a misleading AI summary were significantly less likely to accurately recall the original event, compared to people who read an accurate AI summary. These findings have implications for how AI should be used in critical settings. Though "humans-in-the-loop" are often expected to correct for AI's mistakes, our work suggests human memory can instead be distorted by these mistakes. AI has the potential to generate misinformation, even absent any adversarial intent, which can meaningfully impact human memory.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Resume Screening, Fast and Slow: (Biased) AI Recommendations' Influence on Human Decision Making

AI is increasingly being used collaboratively with people to make decisions in high-stakes domains, but this new paradigm is still not well-understood in many respects -- particularly regarding how AI that replicates human social biases influences people's decision making processes and how that can influence outcomes. In this study, we analyzed the time people spend viewing candidate resumes from an experiment investigating biased AI resume screening to evaluate decision-making fairness and cognitive processes underlying human-AI collaboration. We found that spending more time viewing resumes corresponds to candidates' selection chance increasing by 3-4% if they are not recommended, and people may spend up to 55.6% longer viewing resumes when no AI recommendations are given. Furthermore, people who completed an implicit association test (IAT) before resume screening were significantly more likely to evaluate candidates of different races for the same amount of time, and their IAT scores were also predictive of the time spent in human-AI collaboration. These results demonstrate how people's decision-making processes can be insufficient for overseeing AI in high-stakes domains.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

No Thoughts Just AI: Biased LLM Hiring Recommendations Alter Human Decision Making and Limit Human Autonomy

In this study, we conduct a resume-screening experiment (N=528) where people collaborate with simulated AI models exhibiting race-based preferences (bias) to evaluate candidates for 16 high and low status occupations. Simulated AI bias approximates factual and counterfactual estimates of racial bias in real-world AI systems. We investigate people's preferences for White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian candidates (represented through names and affinity groups on quality-controlled resumes) across 1,526 scenarios and measure their unconscious associations between race and status using implicit association tests (IATs), which predict discriminatory hiring decisions but have not been investigated in human-AI collaboration. When making decisions without AI or with AI that exhibits no race-based preferences, people select all candidates at equal rates. However, when interacting with AI favoring a particular group, people also favor those candidates up to 90% of the time, indicating a significant behavioral shift. The likelihood of selecting candidates whose identities do not align with common race-status stereotypes can increase by 13% if people complete an IAT before conducting resume screening. Finally, even if people think AI recommendations are low quality or not important, their decisions are still vulnerable to AI bias under certain circumstances. This work has implications for people's autonomy in AI-HITL scenarios, AI and work, design and evaluation of AI hiring systems, and strategies for mitigating bias in collaborative decision-making tasks. In particular, organizational and regulatory policy should acknowledge the complex nature of AI-HITL decision making when implementing these systems, educating people who use them, and determining which are subject to oversight.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Unencrypted Flying Objects: Security Lessons from University Small Satellite Developers and Their Code

Satellites face a multitude of security risks that set them apart from hardware on Earth. Small satellites may face additional challenges, as they are often developed on a budget and by amateur organizations or universities that do not consider security. We explore the security practices and preferences of small satellite teams, particularly university satellite teams, to understand what barriers exist to building satellites securely. We interviewed 8 university satellite club leaders across 4 clubs in the U.S. and perform a code audit of 3 of these clubs' code repositories. We find that security practices vary widely across teams, but all teams studied had vulnerabilities available to an unprivileged, ground-based attacker. Participants foresee many risks of unsecured small satellites and indicate security shortcomings in industry and government. Lastly, we identify a set of considerations for how to build future small satellites securely, in amateur organizations and beyond.

cs.CR↗