# Through the Lens of Human-Human Collaboration: A Configurable Research Platform for Exploring Human-Agent Collaboration

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.18008 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.18008/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 37 of its 121 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 22 Sep 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/agents/general-llm-agent-frameworks-and-benchmarks/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 37)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behavior](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03442/) (2023)
- [Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.12712/) (2023)
- [WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.13854/) (2023)
- [A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15594/) (2024)
- [CAMEL: Communicative Agents for "Mind" Exploration of Large Language Model Society](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17760/) (2023)
- [ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Development](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.07924/) (2023)
- [Out of One, Many: Using Language Models to Simulate Human Samples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.06899/) (2022)
- [AgentVerse: Facilitating Multi-Agent Collaboration and Exploring Emergent Behaviors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.10848/) (2023)
- [Using Large Language Models to Simulate Multiple Humans and Replicate Human Subject Studies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.10264/) (2022)
- [On the Utility of Learning about Humans for Human-AI Coordination](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.05789/) (2019)
- [Role-Play with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.16367/) (2023)
- [Questioning the AI: Informing Design Practices for Explainable AI User Experiences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.02478/) (2020)
- [CoAuthor: Designing a Human-AI Collaborative Writing Dataset for Exploring Language Model Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.06796/) (2022)
- [LLM Agents Grounded in Self-Reports Enable General-Purpose Simulation of Individuals](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.10109/) (2024)
- [Agent-as-a-Judge: Evaluate Agents with Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.10934/) (2024)
- [AgentSociety: Large-Scale Simulation of LLM-Driven Generative Agents Advances Understanding of Human Behaviors and Society](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.08691/) (2025)
- [When combinations of humans and AI are useful: A systematic review and meta-analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.06087/) (2024)
- [Scalable Evaluation of Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning with Melting Pot](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.06857/) (2021)
- [Human-AI Collaboration in Data Science: Exploring Data Scientists' Perceptions of Automated AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.02309/) (2019)
- [Human-AI Collaboration Enables More Empathic Conversations in Text-based Peer-to-Peer Mental Health Support](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.15144/) (2022)
- [UXAgent: An LLM Agent-Based Usability Testing Framework for Web Design](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12561/) (2025)
- [Rethinking Human-AI Collaboration in Complex Medical Decision Making: A Case Study in Sepsis Diagnosis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.12368/) (2023)
- [Multi-Agent-as-Judge: Aligning LLM-Agent-Based Automated Evaluation with Multi-Dimensional Human Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.21028/) (2025)
- [OPeRA: A Dataset of Observation, Persona, Rationale, and Action for Evaluating LLMs on Human Online Shopping Behavior Simulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.05606/) (2025)
- [Towards a Design Guideline for RPA Evaluation: A Survey of Large Language Model-Based Role-Playing Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.13012/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Comparing Human Oversight Strategies for Computer-Use Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.04918/) (2026)
- [CollabSkill: Evaluating Human-Agent Collaboration On Real-World Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.09833/) (2026)
- [Humans' ALMANAC: A Human Collaboration Dataset of Action-Level Mental Model Annotations for Agent Collaboration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.06388/) (2026)
- [Gricea: An Open Science Platform for Conversational AI Research](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.22039/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Intelligent systems have traditionally been designed as tools rather than collaborators, often lacking critical characteristics that collaboration partnerships require. Recent advances in large language model (LLM) agents open new opportunities for human-LLM-agent collaboration by enabling natural communication and various social and cognitive behaviors. Yet it remains unclear whether principles of computer-mediated collaboration established in HCI and CSCW persist, change, or fail when humans collaborate with LLM agents. To support systematic investigations of these questions, we introduce an open and configurable research platform for HCI researchers. The platform's modular design allows seamless adaptation of classic CSCW experiments and manipulation of theory-grounded interaction controls. We demonstrate the platform's research efficacy and usability through three case studies: (1) two Shape Factory experiments for resource negotiation with 16 participants, (2) one Hidden Profile experiment for information pooling with 16 participants, and (3) a participatory cognitive walkthrough with five HCI researchers to refine workflows of researcher interface for experiment setup and analysis.