Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Ink and Algorithm: Exploring Temporal Dynamics in Human-AI Collaborative Writing

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.14885 v1 pith:5JZRBDVY submitted 2024-06-21 cs.HC

classification cs.HC
keywords writingcollaborativehumanhuman-aipatternsusagebehaviorseffectively
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The advent of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) has revolutionized the field of writing, marking a shift towards human-AI collaborative writing in education. However, the dynamics of human-AI interaction in the collaborative writing process are not well understood, and thus it remains largely unknown how human learning can be effectively supported with such cutting-edge GAI technologies. In this study, we aim to bridge this gap by investigating how humans employ GAI in collaborative writing and examining the interplay between the patterns of GAI usage and human writing behaviors. Considering the potential varying degrees to which people rely on GAI usage, we proposed to use Dynamic Time Warping time-series clustering for the identification and analysis of common temporal patterns in AI usage during the human-AI collaborative writing processes. Additionally, we incorporated Epistemic Network Analysis to reveal the correlation between GAI usage and human writing behaviors that reflect cognitive processes (i.e., knowledge telling, knowledge transformation, and cognitive presence), aiming to offer insights for developing better approaches and tools to support human to learn effectively via such human-AI collaborative writing activities. Our findings reveal four major distinct temporal patterns in AI utilization and highlight significant correlations between these patterns and human writing behaviors. These findings have significant implications for effectively supporting human learning with GAI in educational writing tasks.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. The Agency Gap in AI-Supported Writing: How Reactive and Proactive Agent Designs Shape Multimodal Reasoning

    cs.HC 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Generative AI literacy predicts independent writing performance only when students must take the initiative with a reactive AI assistant, not when a proactive assistant scaffolds the task.

  2. Beyond Self-Regulated Learning Processes: Unveiling Hidden Tactics in Generative AI-Assisted Writing

    cs.HC 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A hidden Markov model with nine latent tactics detects three GenAI-writing strategy groups whose essay scores differ, a distinction not found when clustering observed SRL processes directly.

Pith tools