Marcel Gohsen
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Previous Organizations / Institutes
The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years
Marcel Gohsen has a total of 51 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Benno Stein
Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Weimar, Germany
10 shared publications - Johannes Kiesel
GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences
9 shared publications - Nailia Mirzakhmedova
Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Weimar, Germany
7 shared publications - Matthias Hagen
Friedrich-Schiller-Universitat Jena, Jena, Germany
4 shared publications - Mohammad Aliannejadi
University of Amsterdam, Amstedam, Netherlands
4 shared publications - Jan Ehlers
Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Weimar, Germany
2 shared publications
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 19 July 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 5374-5377
The 10th Workshop on Search-Oriented Conversational Artificial Intelligence (SCAI'26)
- 19 July 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 5374-5377
Open AccessThe 10th Workshop on Search-Oriented Conversational Artificial Intelligence (SCAI'26)
- Open Access
- 19 July 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 3190-3197
Sim.API: A Middleware to Simplify the Use of User Simulators for Shared Tasks in Conversational Search
- 19 July 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 3190-3197
Open AccessSim.API: A Middleware to Simplify the Use of User Simulators for Shared Tasks in Conversational Search
- Open Access
- 19 July 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 3092-3100
TREC iKAT 2025: A Test Collection for the Offline and Interactive Evaluation of Conversational Search
Conversational search agents, especially with the advent of large language models, have developed into useful tools to satisfy complex information needs of their users. Former research has shown that personalization (i.e., adaptation of agent responses to the preferences and traits of the user) can increase the relevance and perceived answer quality of these systems even further. However, developing accurate personalization methods typically requires rich datasets, both in terms of user profiles and complex conversations, for which only a few resources are publicly available. Over the past three years, the goal of the TREC Interactive Knowledge Assistance Track (iKAT) has been to bridge this gap. In organizing this shared task, we have developed a collection of complex information needs and associated conversations, made to challenge today's conversational agents and thus highlight aspects in need of further research. In this paper, we present the resources made for iKAT 2025, focusing on multi-session conversations (i.e., multiple dialogues per user), dynamically evolving user models, mixed-initiative dialogues, and large-scale human and automatic assessments. In addition to manually designed user profiles and conversations, the test collection for 2025 also contains dialogues between participating systems and our user simulators. All the resources are publicly available in our repository, including the system evaluation both as a result of the offline (i.e., test collection-based) and interactive tasks (i.e., user simulation-based), as well as their source code and model weights, to foster future research in this direction.
- 19 July 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 3092-3100
Open AccessTREC iKAT 2025: A Test Collection for the Offline and Interactive Evaluation of Conversational Search
Conversational search agents, especially with the advent of large language models, have developed into useful tools to satisfy complex information needs of their users. Former research has shown that personalization (i.e., adaptation of agent responses to the preferences and traits of the user) can increase the relevance and perceived answer quality of these systems even further. However, developing accurate personalization methods typically requires rich datasets, both in terms of user profiles and complex conversations, for which only a few resources are publicly available. Over the past three years, the goal of the TREC Interactive Knowledge Assistance Track (iKAT) has been to bridge this gap. In organizing this shared task, we have developed a collection of complex information needs and associated conversations, made to challenge today's conversational agents and thus highlight aspects in need of further research. In this paper, we present the resources made for iKAT 2025, focusing on multi-session conversations (i.e., multiple dialogues per user), dynamically evolving user models, mixed-initiative dialogues, and large-scale human and automatic assessments. In addition to manually designed user profiles and conversations, the test collection for 2025 also contains dialogues between participating systems and our user simulators. All the resources are publicly available in our repository, including the system evaluation both as a result of the offline (i.e., test collection-based) and interactive tasks (i.e., user simulation-based), as well as their source code and model weights, to foster future research in this direction.
- Open Access
- 19 July 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1359-1370
Do Simulated Users Need to Remember? Analyzing the Impact of Memory Models in Conversational Search Evaluation
- 19 July 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1359-1370
Open AccessDo Simulated Users Need to Remember? Analyzing the Impact of Memory Models in Conversational Search Evaluation
- Open Access
- 22 March 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 62-72
Does Cognitive Load Affect Human Accuracy in Detecting Voice-Based Deepfakes?
- 22 March 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 62-72
Open AccessDoes Cognitive Load Affect Human Accuracy in Detecting Voice-Based Deepfakes?
- 3 April 2025
- Published by Springer Nature
- p. 459-466
Overview of Touché 2025: Argumentation Systems
- Open Access
Report on the Workshop on Simulations for Information Access (Sim4IA 2024) at SIGIR 2024
This paper is a report of the Workshop on Simulations for Information Access (Sim4IA) workshop at SIGIR 2024. The workshop had two keynotes, a panel discussion, nine lightning talks, and two breakout sessions. Key takeaways were user simulation's importance in academia and industry, the possible bridging of online and offline evaluation, and the issues of organizing a companion shared task around user simulations for information access. We report on how we organized the workshop, provide a brief overview of what happened at the workshop, and summarize the main topics and findings of the workshop and future work.
Open AccessReport on the Workshop on Simulations for Information Access (Sim4IA 2024) at SIGIR 2024
This paper is a report of the Workshop on Simulations for Information Access (Sim4IA) workshop at SIGIR 2024. The workshop had two keynotes, a panel discussion, nine lightning talks, and two breakout sessions. Key takeaways were user simulation's importance in academia and industry, the possible bridging of online and offline evaluation, and the issues of organizing a companion shared task around user simulations for information access. We report on how we organized the workshop, provide a brief overview of what happened at the workshop, and summarize the main topics and findings of the workshop and future work.
- 14 September 2024
- Published by Springer Nature
- p. 166-171
Who Will Evaluate the Evaluators? Exploring the Gen-IR User Simulation Space
- 14 September 2024
- Published by Springer Nature
- p. 166-171
Who Will Evaluate the Evaluators? Exploring the Gen-IR User Simulation Space
- Open Access
- 17 July 2024
- Published by Springer Nature
- p. 129-146
Are Large Language Models Reliable Argument Quality Annotators?
Evaluating the quality of arguments is a crucial aspect of any system leveraging argument mining. However, it is a challenge to obtain reliable and consistent annotations regarding argument quality, as this usually requires domain-specific expertise of the annotators. Even among experts, the assessment of argument quality is often inconsistent due to the inherent subjectivity of this task. In this paper, we study the potential of using state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) as proxies for argument quality annotators. To assess the capability of LLMs in this regard, we analyze the agreement between model, human expert, and human novice annotators based on an established taxonomy of argument quality dimensions. Our findings highlight that LLMs can produce consistent annotations, with a moderately high agreement with human experts across most of the quality dimensions. Moreover, we show that using LLMs as additional annotators can significantly improve the agreement between annotators. These results suggest that LLMs can serve as a valuable tool for automated argument quality assessment, thus streamlining and accelerating the evaluation of large argument datasets .
- 17 July 2024
- Published by Springer Nature
- p. 129-146
Open AccessAre Large Language Models Reliable Argument Quality Annotators?
Evaluating the quality of arguments is a crucial aspect of any system leveraging argument mining. However, it is a challenge to obtain reliable and consistent annotations regarding argument quality, as this usually requires domain-specific expertise of the annotators. Even among experts, the assessment of argument quality is often inconsistent due to the inherent subjectivity of this task. In this paper, we study the potential of using state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) as proxies for argument quality annotators. To assess the capability of LLMs in this regard, we analyze the agreement between model, human expert, and human novice annotators based on an established taxonomy of argument quality dimensions. Our findings highlight that LLMs can produce consistent annotations, with a moderately high agreement with human experts across most of the quality dimensions. Moreover, we show that using LLMs as additional annotators can significantly improve the agreement between annotators. These results suggest that LLMs can serve as a valuable tool for automated argument quality assessment, thus streamlining and accelerating the evaluation of large argument datasets .
- Open Access
- 8 July 2024
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-7
Futuring Machines: An Interactive Framework for Participative Futuring Through Human-AI Collaborative Speculative Fiction Writing
Imagining future scenarios arising from events and (in)actions is crucial for democratic participation, but is often left to experts who have in-depth knowledge of, for example, social, political, environmental or technological trends. A widely accepted method for non-experts to think about future scenarios is to write fictional short stories set in speculative futures. To support the writing process and thus further lower the barrier for this form of participation, we introduce Futuring Machines, a framework for collaborative writing of speculative fiction through instruction-based conversation between humans and AI. Futuring Machines is specifically designed to stimulate reflection on future scenarios in both participatory workshops and individual use.
- 8 July 2024
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-7
Open AccessFuturing Machines: An Interactive Framework for Participative Futuring Through Human-AI Collaborative Speculative Fiction Writing
Imagining future scenarios arising from events and (in)actions is crucial for democratic participation, but is often left to experts who have in-depth knowledge of, for example, social, political, environmental or technological trends. A widely accepted method for non-experts to think about future scenarios is to write fictional short stories set in speculative futures. To support the writing process and thus further lower the barrier for this form of participation, we introduce Futuring Machines, a framework for collaborative writing of speculative fiction through instruction-based conversation between humans and AI. Futuring Machines is specifically designed to stimulate reflection on future scenarios in both participatory workshops and individual use.