Cited by 151Data Visualization and AnalyticsInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorUsability and User Interface Design

Sensecape: Enabling Multilevel Exploration and Sensemaking with Large Language Models

Open access
Suh, Sangho, Min, Bryan, Palani, Srishti, Xia, Haijun·2023·Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology

Abstract

People are increasingly turning to large language models (LLMs) for complex information tasks like academic research or planning a move to another city. However, while they often require working in a nonlinear manner — e.g., to arrange information spatially to organize and make sense of it, current interfaces for interacting with LLMs are generally linear to support conversational interaction. To address this limitation and explore how we can support LLM-powered exploration and sensemaking, we developed Sensecape, an interactive system designed to support complex information tasks with an LLM by enabling users to (1) manage the complexity of information through multilevel abstraction and (2) switch seamlessly between foraging and sensemaking. Our within-subject user study reveals that Sensecape empowers users to explore more topics and structure their knowledge hierarchically, thanks to the externalization of levels of abstraction. We contribute implications for LLM-based workflows and interfaces for information tasks.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3586183.3606756

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Suh et al. highlighted that the current interaction paradigm with LLMs tends to converge on a limited set of ideas, potentially stifling creative exploration.

    “Suh et al. [58,59] highlighted that the current interaction paradigm with LLMs tends to converge on a limited set of ideas, potentially stifling creative exploration.”

    From Human Creativity in the Age of LLMs: Randomized Experiments on Divergent and Convergent Thinking (2025) · cites this paper as [59]

    The Introduction describes limitations of linear conversational LLM interfaces for nonlinear information exploration, and the Discussion reports that Sensecape users explored more broadly than users of the baseline interface. The paper does not establish that current interactions tend to converge on a limited set of ideas or specifically stifle creative exploration. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Kim M Fairchild, Steven E Poltrock, and George W Furnas. 2013. Semnet: Three- dimensional graphic representations of large knowledge bases. In Cognitive science and its applications for human-computer interaction. Psychology Press, 215-248.
  2. David Kirsh. 2001. The context of work. Human-Computer Interaction 16, 2-4 (2001), 305-322. https://interactivity.ucsd.edu/articles/HCI/fnal.html
  3. Peter Pirolli and Stuart Card. 2005. The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identifed through cognitive task analysis. In Proceedings of international conference on intelligence analysis, Vol. 5. McLean, VA, USA, 2-4.
  4. Sharon Alayne Widmayer. 2004. Schema theory: An introduction. Retrieved December 26 (2004), 2004.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Suh, S., Min, B., Palani, S., & Xia, H.
Affiliations
University of California San Diego (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology
Publisher
ACM
Published
2023-10-29
Pages
1-18
OpenAlex
W4377371585
Cited by
151
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 79 · 2024: 27
FWCI
16.18
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Data Visualization and Analytics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
large language models, sensemaking, information exploration, knowledge organization, foraging, nonlinear interactions, information complexity, knowledge hierarchies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review