pith. sign in

arxiv: 2501.04163 · v4 · pith:MH6F2SMYnew · submitted 2025-01-07 · 💻 cs.HC

HistoryPalette: Supporting Exploration and Reuse of Past Alternatives in Image Generation and Editing

Karim Benharrak , Amy Pavel This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 06:03 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.HC
keywords HistoryPalettegenerative image editingdesign alternativesexploration and reuseuser studiescreativity support toolscollaborative design
0
0 comments X

The pith

HistoryPalette organizes past image design alternatives by spatial position, topic category, and creation time to support their exploration and reuse.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Creative tasks involve producing many alternatives that creators want to revisit, but current tools force manual organization through file versions or hidden layers. HistoryPalette addresses this by presenting prior designs in a palette sorted along three dimensions: where they appear in the image, what topic they cover, and when they were created. User studies with creative professionals and their client collaborators show that this organization lets people quickly preview and reuse earlier ideas while generating and editing new images. A sympathetic reader would care because generative AI tools now produce alternatives faster than people can manage them.

Core claim

The paper presents HistoryPalette, a system for supporting exploration and reuse of prior designs in generative image creation and editing. Using HistoryPalette, creators and their collaborators explore a palette of prior design alternatives organized by spatial position, topic category, and creation time. This enables creators to quickly preview and reuse their prior work, as demonstrated when participants in creative professional and client collaborator user studies generated and edited images by exploring and reusing past design alternatives with the system.

What carries the argument

The HistoryPalette interface that displays design alternatives organized by spatial position, topic category, and creation time.

If this is right

  • Creators can preview prior work without relying on tedious manual systems like saving file versions or hiding layers.
  • Collaboration between creators and clients improves through shared exploration of design alternatives.
  • Participants in the studies successfully generated and edited images using the system to reuse past alternatives.
  • Generative image tools gain support for managing the increased number of alternatives from rapid prompt experiments.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar palettes could be tested in other generative domains such as video or 3D content creation.
  • Automatic detection of topics and positions might reduce the need for manual tagging of alternatives.
  • Long-term use might reveal whether the three-way organization scales as the number of alternatives grows very large.

Load-bearing premise

That organizing alternatives by spatial position, topic category, and creation time is sufficient to support effective exploration and reuse.

What would settle it

A controlled study in which users with HistoryPalette show no improvement in reuse speed or satisfaction compared to manual file-version methods would falsify the effectiveness claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.04163 by Amy Pavel, Karim Benharrak.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: HistoryPalette enables rapid exploration and reuse of past design alternatives (circles). Users use the generation view [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Overview of palettes in our system: the position [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Users interact with the canvas by selecting a region and entering a prompt, such as “modern house.” HistoryPalette [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Creative professionals and client collaborators interactions with HistoryPalette and the palettes. While creative [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: E1 reused a past design alternative of a golf course [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: E2 generated a path to the house and spent the next [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: E3 used HistoryPalette to reuse past designs (here: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Original (top) and final (bottom) edited images by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Participant ratings on the usefulness of the features [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Example successes and errors of our filter that re [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Creative tasks require creators to iteratively produce, select, and discard potentially useful ideas. Now, creativity tools include generative AI features (e.g., Photoshop Generative Fill) that increase the number of alternatives creators consider through rapid experiments with prompts and random generations. Creators use tedious manual systems for organizing their prior ideas by saving file versions or hiding layers, but they lack the support they want for reusing prior alternatives in personal work or in communication with others. We present HistoryPalette, a system that supports exploration and reuse of prior designs in generative image creation and editing. Using HistoryPalette, creators and their collaborators explore a "palette" of prior design alternatives organized by spatial position, topic category, and creation time. HistoryPalette enables creators to quickly preview and reuse their prior work. In creative professional and client collaborator user studies, participants generated and edited images by exploring and reusing past design alternatives with HistoryPalette.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper presents HistoryPalette, a system for generative image creation and editing that organizes prior design alternatives into a palette by spatial position, topic category, and creation time. It claims this enables quick preview and reuse of past work, with user studies involving creative professionals and client collaborators demonstrating that participants generated and edited images by exploring and reusing alternatives via the system.

Significance. If the evaluation holds, the work addresses a practical gap in current generative tools by providing structured support for managing and reusing the large number of alternatives produced during iterative creative processes, with potential value for both individual creators and collaborative client workflows.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The claim that 'user studies showed benefits' and that 'participants generated and edited images by exploring and reusing past design alternatives with HistoryPalette' is presented without any details on study design, number of participants, metrics, tasks, quantitative results, or qualitative findings. This prevents evaluation of whether the data support the central claim about utility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

Thank you for your review. We address the concern about the abstract below and will make the requested changes.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The claim that 'user studies showed benefits' and that 'participants generated and edited images by exploring and reusing past design alternatives with HistoryPalette' is presented without any details on study design, number of participants, metrics, tasks, quantitative results, or qualitative findings. This prevents evaluation of whether the data support the central claim about utility.

    Authors: We agree the abstract presents the user-study claims at a high level without supporting specifics. The full paper contains detailed descriptions of the two studies (participant counts, tasks, metrics, quantitative results, and qualitative findings) in the dedicated Evaluation sections. To improve evaluability of the abstract claims, we will revise the abstract to include a concise summary of study design, participant numbers, and main outcomes. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

This is a standard HCI system+study paper with no equations, derivations, fitted parameters, or predictive claims. The central contribution is a described interface (HistoryPalette) for organizing alternatives by spatial position, topic, and time, plus qualitative results from user studies with professionals and collaborators. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to its own inputs, self-citation chains, or renamed empirical patterns; the evaluation is externally falsifiable via the reported participant feedback and does not rely on any internal mathematical equivalence.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities because this is an HCI system-design paper without mathematical modeling or theoretical derivations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5680 in / 1063 out tokens · 67383 ms · 2026-05-23T06:03:25.743174+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. MiXR: Harvesting and Recomposing Geometry from Real-World Objects for In-Situ 3D Design

    cs.HC 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    MiXR enables in-situ 3D design by harvesting real-world geometry for user-defined compositions that generative AI then refines, outperforming text-only generative methods in control and fidelity per a 12-person study.

  2. MiXR: Harvesting and Recomposing Geometry from Real-World Objects for In-Situ 3D Design

    cs.HC 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    MiXR enables in-situ 3D compositional modeling by harvesting real-world geometry in XR and using generative AI to synthesize coherent models from user-defined assemblies.

  3. AnimationDiff: A Visual Comparison Tool for Generated 3D Character Animations

    cs.HC 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    AnimationDiff is a visual comparison tool that combines contextual scene viewing, overlay/side-by-side modes, filtering, and temporal lenses to help users select among generated 3D character animations.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 74 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    [n. d.]. Adobe Photoshop. https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop.html

    work page

  2. [2]

    [n. d.]. Figma. https://www.figma.com/

    work page

  3. [3]

    [n. d.]. Stable Diffusion XL Refiner 1.0. https://huggingface.co/stabilityai/stable- diffusion-xl-refiner-1.0 13

    work page

  4. [4]

    Shm Garanganao Almeda, JD Zamfirescu-Pereira, Kyu Won Kim, Pradeep Mani Rathnam, and Bjoern Hartmann. 2024. Prompting for Discovery: Flex- ible Sense-Making for AI Art-Making with Dreamsheets. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1–17

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Tyler Angert, Miroslav Suzara, Jenny Han, Christopher Pondoc, and Hariha- ran Subramonyam. 2023. Spellburst: A Node-based Interface for Exploratory Creative Coding with Natural Language Prompts. Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (2023). https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:260704716

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Jesse Josua Benjamin, Arne Berger, Nick Merrill, and James Pierce. 2021. Machine learning uncertainty as a design material: A post-phenomenological inquiry. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems . 1–14

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    Stephen Brade, Bryan Wang, Mauricio Sousa, Sageev Oore, and Tovi Gross- man. 2023. Promptify: Text-to-image generation through interactive prompt exploration with large language models. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology . 1–14

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, 2 (jan 2006), 77–101. https://doi.org/10. 1191/1478088706qp063oa

    work page 2006

  9. [9]

    Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2019. Reflecting on reflexive the- matic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 11, 4 (2019), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

    work page doi:10.1080/2159676x.2019.1628806 2019

  10. [10]

    Sara Bunian, Kai Li, Chaima Jemmali, Casper Harteveld, Yun Fu, and Magy Seif Seif El-Nasr. 2021. Vins: Visual search for mobile user interface design. In Pro- ceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1–14

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    Chilton, S

    Lydia B. Chilton, S. Petridis, and Maneesh Agrawala. 2019. VisiBlends: A Flexible Workflow for Visual Blends. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2019). https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID: 96456140

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    DaEun Choi, Sumin Hong, Jeongeon Park, John Joon Young Chung, and Juho Kim. 2023. CreativeConnect: Supporting Reference Recombination for Graphic Design Ideation with Generative AI. arXiv:2312.11949 [cs.HC]

    work page arXiv 2023

  13. [13]

    John Joon Young Chung and Eytan Adar. 2023. Artinter: AI-Powered Boundary Objects for Commissioning Visual Arts. InProceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 1997–2018

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    Hai Dang, Frederik Brudy, George Fitzmaurice, and Fraser Anderson. 2023. WorldSmith: Iterative and Expressive Prompting for World Building with a Generative AI. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (San Francisco, CA, USA) (UIST ’23). Asso- ciation for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 63,...

    work page doi:10.1145/3586183.3606772 2023

  15. [15]

    Yingchaojie Feng, Xingbo Wang, Kam Kwai Wong, Sijia Wang, Yuhong Lu, Min- feng Zhu, Baicheng Wang, and Wei Chen. 2023. Promptmagician: Interactive prompt engineering for text-to-image creation.IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (2023)

    work page 2023

  16. [16]

    Thomas Funkhouser, Patrick Min, Michael Kazhdan, Joyce Chen, Alex Halderman, David Dobkin, and David Jacobs. 2003. A search engine for 3D models. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 22, 1 (2003), 83–105

    work page 2003

  17. [17]

    Floraine Grabler, Maneesh Agrawala, Wilmot Li, Mira Dontcheva, and Takeo Igarashi. 2009. Generating photo manipulation tutorials by demonstration. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2009 papers. 1–9

    work page 2009

  18. [18]

    Tovi Grossman, Justin Matejka, and George Fitzmaurice. 2010. Chronicle: capture, exploration, and playback of document workflow histories. In Proceedings of the 23nd annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology . 143–152

    work page 2010

  19. [19]

    Björn Hartmann, Sean Follmer, Antonio Ricciardi, Timothy Cardenas, and Scott R Klemmer. 2010. D. note: revising user interfaces through change tracking, an- notations, and alternatives. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 493–502

    work page 2010

  20. [20]

    Scarlett R Herring, Chia-Chen Chang, Jesse Krantzler, and Brian P Bailey. 2009. Getting inspired! Understanding how and why examples are used in creative design practice. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 87–96

    work page 2009

  21. [21]

    Scarlett R Herring, Brett R Jones, and Brian P Bailey. 2009. Idea generation tech- niques among creative professionals. In2009 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. IEEE, 1–10

    work page 2009

  22. [22]

    Forrest Huang, John F Canny, and Jeffrey Nichols. 2019. Swire: Sketch-based user interface retrieval. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–10

    work page 2019

  23. [23]

    Rong Huang, Hai-Chuan Lin, Chuanzhang Chen, Kang Zhang, and Wei Zeng

    work page

  24. [24]

    arXiv:2401.17120 [cs.HC]

    PlantoGraphy: Incorporating Iterative Design Process into Generative Artificial Intelligence for Landscape Rendering. arXiv:2401.17120 [cs.HC]

    work page arXiv

  25. [25]

    Fitzmaurice, and Fraser Anderson

    Alexander Ivanov, David Ledo, Tovi Grossman, George W. Fitzmaurice, and Fraser Anderson. 2022. MoodCubes: Immersive Spaces for Collecting, Discovering and Envisioning Inspiration Materials. Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (2022). https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID: 249579156

    work page 2022

  26. [26]

    Youwen Kang, Zhida Sun, Sitong Wang, Zeyu Huang, Ziming Wu, and Xiao- juan Ma. 2021. MetaMap: Supporting Visual Metaphor Ideation through Multi- dimensional Example-based Exploration. Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2021). https://api.semanticscholar.org/ CorpusID:233987804

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Andruid Kerne. 2000. CollageMachine: An Interactive Agent of Web Recombi- nation. Leonardo 33 (2000), 347–350. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID: 57560897

    work page 2000

  28. [28]

    Kevin Gonyop Kim, Richard Lee Davis, Alessia Eletta Coppi, Alberto A. P. Catta- neo, and Pierre Dillenbourg. 2022. Mixplorer: Scaffolding Design Space Explo- ration through Genetic Recombination of Multiple Peoples’ Designs to Support Novices’ Creativity.Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2022). https://api.seman...

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    Diederik P Kingma and Max Welling. 2013. Auto-encoding variational bayes. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6114 (2013)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  30. [30]

    Scott R Klemmer, Michael Thomsen, Ethan Phelps-Goodman, Robert Lee, and James A Landay. 2002. Where do web sites come from? Capturing and interacting with design history. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. 1–8

    work page 2002

  31. [31]

    Hyung-Kwon Ko, Subin An, Gwanmo Park, Seung Kwon Kim, Daesik Kim, Bo- hyoung Kim, Jaemin Jo, and Jinwook Seo. 2022. We-toon: A Communication Support System between Writers and Artists in Collaborative Webtoon Sketch Revision. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 1–14

    work page 2022

  32. [32]

    Nicholas Kong, Tovi Grossman, Björn Hartmann, Maneesh Agrawala, and George Fitzmaurice. 2012. Delta: a tool for representing and comparing workflows. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1027–1036

    work page 2012

  33. [33]

    Ranjitha Kumar, Jerry O Talton, Salman Ahmad, and Scott R Klemmer. 2011. Bricolage: example-based retargeting for web design. InProceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 2197–2206

    work page 2011

  34. [34]

    Katrien Laenen, Susana Zoghbi, and Marie-Francine Moens. 2018. Web search of fashion items with multimodal querying. In Proceedings of the eleventh ACM international conference on web search and data mining . 342–350

    work page 2018

  35. [35]

    Brian Lee, Savil Srivastava, Ranjitha Kumar, Ronen Brafman, and Scott R Klemmer

    work page

  36. [36]

    In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems

    Designing with interactive example galleries. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems . 2257–2266

    work page

  37. [37]

    Jingyi Li, Sonia Hashim, and Jennifer Jacobs. 2021. What we can learn from visual artists about software development. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1–14

    work page 2021

  38. [38]

    Vivian Liu, Han Qiao, and Lydia Chilton. 2022. Opal: Multimodal image genera- tion for news illustration. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology . 1–17

    work page 2022

  39. [39]

    Vivian Liu, Han Qiao, and Lydia B. Chilton. 2022. Opal: Multimodal Image Generation for News Illustration. Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (2022). https://api.semanticscholar. org/CorpusID:248240054

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    Fitzmaurice

    Justin Matejka, Michael Glueck, Erin Bradner, Ali Hashemi, Tovi Grossman, and George W. Fitzmaurice. 2018. Dream Lens: Exploration and Visualization of Large-Scale Generative Design Datasets. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2018). https://api.semanticscholar.org/ CorpusID:5041597

    work page 2018

  41. [41]

    Philipp Mayring. 2021. Qualitative content analysis: A step-by-step guide. Quali- tative Content Analysis (2021), 1–100

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    Chenlin Meng, Yutong He, Yang Song, Jiaming Song, Jiajun Wu, Jun-Yan Zhu, and Stefano Ermon. 2021. Sdedit: Guided image synthesis and editing with stochastic differential equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.01073 (2021)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  43. [43]

    MidJourney. 2022. MidJourney AI Image Generation Tool. https://www. midjourney.com Version 5.0, accessed September 12, 2024

    work page 2022

  44. [44]

    Peter O’Donovan, Aseem Agarwala, and Aaron Hertzmann. 2015. Designscape: Design with interactive layout suggestions. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems . 1221–1224

    work page 2015

  45. [45]

    Jasper O’Leary, Holger Winnemöller, Wilmot Li, Mira Dontcheva, and Morgan Dixon. 2018. Charrette: Supporting In-Person Discussions around Iterations in User Interface Design. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1–11

    work page 2018

  46. [46]

    OpenAI. 2021. DALL ·E AI Image Generation Tool. https://openai.com/research/ dall-e Version 2, accessed September 12, 2024

    work page 2021

  47. [47]

    OpenAI. 2024. OpenAI API. https://platform.openai.com. Accessed: 2024-12-1

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    Sanghyuk Park, Minchul Shin, Sungho Ham, Seungkwon Choe, and Yoohoon Kang. 2019. Study on fashion image retrieval methods for efficient fashion visual search. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops. 0–0

    work page 2019

  49. [49]

    Amy Pavel, Floraine Berthouzoz, Björn Hartmann, and Maneesh Agrawala. 2013. Browsing and analyzing the command-level structure of large collections of image manipulation tutorials. Citeseer, Tech. Rep. (2013). 14

    work page 2013

  50. [50]

    Tingting Qiao, Jing Zhang, Duanqing Xu, and Dacheng Tao. 2019. Learn, Imagine and Create: Text-to-Image Generation from Prior Knowledge. In Neural Informa- tion Processing Systems. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:202783730

    work page 2019

  51. [51]

    Tingting Qiao, Jing Zhang, Duanqing Xu, and Dacheng Tao. 2019. MirrorGAN: Learning Text-To-Image Generation by Redescription. 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2019), 1505–1514. https: //api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:76661216

    work page 2019

  52. [52]

    Eric Rawn, Jingyi Li, Eric Paulos, and Sarah E. Chasins. 2023. Understanding Version Control as Material Interaction with Quickpose. InProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Hamburg, Germany) (CHI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 126, 18 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581394

    work page doi:10.1145/3544548.3581394 2023

  53. [53]

    Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Björn Ommer. 2021. High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Models. arXiv:2112.10752 [cs.CV]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  54. [54]

    Nataniel Ruiz, Yuanzhen Li, Varun Jampani, Yael Pritch, Michael Rubinstein, and Kfir Aberman. 2023. Dreambooth: Fine tuning text-to-image diffusion models for subject-driven generation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition . 22500–22510

    work page 2023

  55. [55]

    Donald A Schön. 2017. The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Routledge

    work page 2017

  56. [56]

    Moushumi Sharmin, Brian P Bailey, Cole Coats, and Kevin Hamilton. 2009. Un- derstanding knowledge management practices for early design activity and its implications for reuse. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2367–2376

    work page 2009

  57. [57]

    Ben Shneiderman. 2007. Creativity support tools: accelerating discovery and innovation. Commun. ACM 50, 12 (2007), 20–32

    work page 2007

  58. [58]

    Sarah Sterman, Molly Jane Nicholas, and Eric Paulos. 2022. Towards Creative Version Control. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6, CSCW2 (2022), 1–25

    work page 2022

  59. [59]

    Blair Subbaraman, Shenna Shim, and Nadya Peek. 2023. Forking a Sketch: How the OpenProcessing Community Uses Remixing to Collect, Annotate, Tune, and Extend Creative Code. Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (2023). https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:259376328

    work page 2023

  60. [60]

    Amanda Swearngin, Chenglong Wang, Alannah Oleson, James Fogarty, and Amy J. Ko. 2020. Scout: Rapid Exploration of Interface Layout Alternatives through High-Level Design Constraints. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Con- ference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13....

    work page doi:10.1145/3313831.3376593 2020

  61. [61]

    Michael Terry and Elizabeth D Mynatt. 2002. Recognizing creative needs in user interface design. In Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Creativity & Cognition . 38–44

    work page 2002

  62. [62]

    Michael Terry, Elizabeth D Mynatt, Kumiyo Nakakoji, and Yasuhiro Yamamoto

    work page

  63. [63]

    In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems

    Variation in element and action: supporting simultaneous development of alternative solutions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. 711–718

    work page

  64. [64]

    An Adapt-or-Die Type of Situation

    Veera Vimpari, Annakaisa Kultima, Perttu Hämäläinen, and Christian Guckels- berger. 2023. “An Adapt-or-Die Type of Situation”: Perception, Adoption, and Use of Text-to-Image-Generation AI by Game Industry Professionals. Proceed- ings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 7 (2023), 131 – 164. https: //api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:257206087

    work page 2023

  65. [65]

    Kelly, Saumya Pareek, Qiushi Zhou, and Eduardo Velloso

    Samangi Wadinambiarachchi, Ryan M. Kelly, Saumya Pareek, Qiushi Zhou, and Eduardo Velloso. 2024. The Effects of Generative AI on Design Fixation and Divergent Thinking. arXiv:2403.11164 [cs.HC]

    work page arXiv 2024

  66. [66]

    Sitong Wang, Savvas Petridis, Taeahn Kwon, Xiaojuan Ma, and Lydia B Chilton

    work page

  67. [67]

    In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

    PopBlends: Strategies for conceptual blending with large language models. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1–19

    work page 2023

  68. [68]

    Shun-Yu Wang, Wei-Chung Su, Serena Chen, Ching-Yi Tsai, Marta Misztal, Kather- ine M Cheng, Alwena Lin, Yu Chen, and Mike Y Chen. 2024. RoomDreaming: Generative-AI Approach to Facilitating Iterative, Preliminary Interior Design Exploration. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–20

    work page 2024

  69. [69]

    Zhijie Wang, Yuheng Huang, Da Song, Lei Ma, and Tianyi Zhang. 2024. PromptCharm: Text-to-Image Generation through Multi-modal Prompting and Refinement. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–21

    work page 2024

  70. [70]

    Jeremy Warner, Kyu Won Kim, and Bjoern Hartmann. 2023. Interactive Flexi- ble Style Transfer for Vector Graphics. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology . 1–14

    work page 2023

  71. [71]

    Weihao Xia, Yujiu Yang, Jing Xue, and Baoyuan Wu. 2021. TediGAN: Text-Guided Diverse Face Image Generation and Manipulation. 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2021), 2256–2265. https: //api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:235702618

    work page 2021

  72. [72]

    Saelyne Yang, Changyoon Lee, Hijung Valentina Shin, and Juho Kim. 2020. Snap- stream: Snapshot-based interaction in live streaming for visual art. InProceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1–12

    work page 2020

  73. [73]

    Wood- bury, Maher Elkhaldi, Naghmi I

    Loutfouz Zaman, Wolfgang Stuerzlinger, Christian Neugebauer, Robert F. Wood- bury, Maher Elkhaldi, Naghmi I. Shireen, and Michael A. Terry. 2015. GEM-NI: A System for Creating and Managing Alternatives In Generative Design. Proceed- ings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2015). https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusI...

    work page 2015

  74. [74]

    Driveway

    Lvmin Zhang, Anyi Rao, and Maneesh Agrawala. 2023. Adding conditional con- trol to text-to-image diffusion models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision . 3836–3847. 15 False Positive “Driveway” False Negative “modern house” True Negative “sportscar” True Positive “person” Figure 10: Example successes and errors of our ...

    work page 2023