

















Abstract:The equitable assessment of individual contribution in teams remains a persistent challenge, where conflict and disparity in workload can result in unfair performance evaluation, often requiring manual intervention - a costly and challenging process. We survey existing tool features and identify a gap in conflict resolution methods and AI integration. To address this, we propose a framework and implementation design for a novel AI-enhanced tool that assists in dispute investigation. The framework organises heterogeneous artefacts - submissions (code, text, media), communications (chat, email), coordination records (meeting logs, tasks), peer assessments, and contextual information - into three dimensions with nine benchmarks: Contribution, Interaction, and Role. Objective measures are normalised, aggregated per dimension, and paired with inequality measures (Gini index) to surface conflict markers. A Large Language Model (LLM) architecture performs validated and contextual analysis over these measures to generate interpretable and transparent advisory judgments. We argue for feasibility under current statutory and institutional policy, and outline practical analytics (sentimental, task fidelity, word/line count, etc.), bias safeguards, limitations, and practical challenges.
| Comments: | 20 pages, 8 figures, 8 tables |
| Subjects: | Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2511.07667 [cs.AI] |
| (or arXiv:2511.07667v2 [cs.AI] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2511.07667 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite |
From: Jakub Slapek [view email]
[v1]
Mon, 10 Nov 2025 22:22:55 UTC (236 KB)
[v2]
Tue, 26 May 2026 10:16:44 UTC (236 KB)
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理,仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。