arXiv:2607. 25423v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Eliciting explainable AI (XAI) requirements from stroke survivors presents a methodological challenge with direct implications for the design of trustworthy brain-computer interfaces for rehabilitation.
By Param Rajpura, Yogesh Kumar Meena
arXiv:2606. 14306v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Current Generative AI (GenAI) interfaces remain largely constrained to chatbox interaction, which can impose high cognitive demands on users and create substantial barriers for people with intellectual disabilities (ID), including prompt formulation difficulties, response overload, and limited mechanisms to assess information reliability.
By Virginia Francisco, Daniel Guasch, Raquel Herv\'as
arXiv:2606. 24960v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tailoring stroke rehabilitation requires assessing how movements are organized, not merely if they succeed.
By Tamim Ahmed, Thanassis Rikakis
arXiv:2608.24555v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Prehospital stroke assessment aims to accurately identify stroke symptoms and make rapid decisions through standardized procedures within an extremel...
By Wentao Yang, Zhenye Xu, Ruoyi Li, Musen Zhang, Yao Guo
The paper argues that deploying generative AI agents requires more than isolated task success; they must remain useful across repeated interactions, changing conditions, and dependencies on people within shared workflows. The authors introduce two complementary evaluation aspects—operational resilience and considerate participation—to assess how agents recover from blocked work, communicate limits, and adapt to affected people and role boundaries. Using 120 simulated healthcare trajectories across two AI models and twelve stakeholder-derived tasks under varying challenge levels, the study finds that agents shift toward greater human dependence and increased workload as challenge accumulates, while also broadening from task-focused adaptation to task reframing and wider coordination.
By Yuanchen Bai, Zijian Ding, Angelique Taylor
The paper surveys 61 studies on mental‑health AI and identifies a misalignment in how trust is evaluated across disciplines. It proposes a three‑layer framework—human‑oriented, interaction‑oriented, and AI‑oriented trust—and maps stakeholder perspectives onto these layers. The authors argue that future research should focus on calibrating human trust to actual interaction and AI trustworthiness rather than merely maximizing perceived trust.
By Xin Sun, Yue Su, Yifan Mo, Qingyu Meng, Yuxuan Li, Min Chen, Mengyuan Zhang, Saku Sugawara, Charlotte Gerritsen, Sander L. Koole, Koen Hindriks, Jiahuan Pei