The DOI matches its DataCite record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Understanding How Paper Writers Use AI-Generated Captions in Figure Caption Writing
Abstract
Figures and their captions play a key role in scientific publications. However, despite their importance, many captions in published papers are poorly crafted, largely due to a lack of attention by paper authors. While prior AI research has explored caption generation, it has mainly focused on reader-centered use cases, where users evaluate generated captions rather than actively integrating them into their writing. This paper addresses this gap by investigating how paper authors incorporate AI-generated captions into their writing process through a user study involving 18 participants. Each participant rewrote captions for two figures from their own recently published work, using captions generated by state-of-the-art AI models as a resource. By analyzing video recordings of the writing process through interaction analysis, we observed that participants often began by copying and refining AI-generated captions. Paper writers favored longer, detail-rich captions that integrated textual and visual elements but found current AI models less effective for complex figures. These findings highlight the nuanced and diverse nature of figure caption composition, revealing design opportunities for AI systems to better support the challenges of academic writing.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“Effective prompting and customizations are also reported to help writers enhance their alt text generation process [53].”
From How University Disability Services Professionals Write Image Descriptions for HCI Figures Using Generative AI (2026) · cites this paper as [53]
In the citing paper
“Recently, studies [44, 52, 53] have applied generative AI as an automated method to produce alt text. However, these studies show varying performance on different types of images and call for integrating the author/writer's expertise.”
From How University Disability Services Professionals Write Image Descriptions for HCI Figures Using Generative AI (2026) · cites this paper as [53]
In the citing paper
“Hence, understanding how DSO professionals engage with these systems and evaluating how useful the outputs they produce are is key to designing accessible authoring workflows that empower non-experts to create accurate and inclusive alt text [53].”
From How University Disability Services Professionals Write Image Descriptions for HCI Figures Using Generative AI (2026) · cites this paper as [53]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Huang, C.-Y., Hsu, T.-Y., Rossi, R., Nenkova, A., Kim, S., Chan, G. Y.-Y., Koh, E., Giles, C. L., & Huang, T.-H. '. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2302.12324
Self-citation
Cited by
Raees, M., Iwamoto, Y., Papangelis, K., Heard, J., & Tigwell, G. W. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.08937 · Cited by 2
“In addition, alt text requires summarizing the content in a concise and informative way, interpreting relationships, and contextual relevance of key insights from scientific figures [13].”
Influential
Metadata
- Authors
- Yin, H., Ng, Hsu, T.-Y., Min, J., Kim, S., Rossi, R. A., Yu, T., Jung, H., & Huang, T.-H. '.
- Affiliations
- Sam
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- arXiv
- 2501.06317
- References
- 1
- Type
- Preprint
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
