Modeling Human-AI Team Decision Making
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2201.02759v1
- Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2022 04:23:23 GMT
- Title: Modeling Human-AI Team Decision Making
- Authors: Wei Ye, Francesco Bullo, Noah Friedkin, Ambuj K Singh
- Abstract summary: We present a sequence of intellective issues to a set of human groups aided by imperfect AI agents.
A group's goal was to appraise the relative expertise of the group's members and its available AI agents.
We show the value of socio-cognitive constructs of prospect theory, influence dynamics, and Bayesian learning in predicting the behavior of human-AI groups.
- Score: 14.368767225297585
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
- Abstract: AI and humans bring complementary skills to group deliberations. Modeling
this group decision making is especially challenging when the deliberations
include an element of risk and an exploration-exploitation process of
appraising the capabilities of the human and AI agents. To investigate this
question, we presented a sequence of intellective issues to a set of human
groups aided by imperfect AI agents. A group's goal was to appraise the
relative expertise of the group's members and its available AI agents, evaluate
the risks associated with different actions, and maximize the overall reward by
reaching consensus. We propose and empirically validate models of human-AI team
decision making under such uncertain circumstances, and show the value of
socio-cognitive constructs of prospect theory, influence dynamics, and Bayesian
learning in predicting the behavior of human-AI groups.
Related papers
- Combining AI Control Systems and Human Decision Support via Robustness and Criticality [53.10194953873209]
We extend a methodology for adversarial explanations (AE) to state-of-the-art reinforcement learning frameworks.
We show that the learned AI control system demonstrates robustness against adversarial tampering.
In a training / learning framework, this technology can improve both the AI's decisions and explanations through human interaction.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-03T15:38:57Z) - ADESSE: Advice Explanations in Complex Repeated Decision-Making Environments [14.105935964906976]
This work considers a problem setup where an intelligent agent provides advice to a human decision-maker.
We develop an approach named ADESSE to generate explanations about the adviser agent to improve human trust and decision-making.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-31T08:59:20Z) - Towards Human-AI Deliberation: Design and Evaluation of LLM-Empowered Deliberative AI for AI-Assisted Decision-Making [47.33241893184721]
In AI-assisted decision-making, humans often passively review AI's suggestion and decide whether to accept or reject it as a whole.
We propose Human-AI Deliberation, a novel framework to promote human reflection and discussion on conflicting human-AI opinions in decision-making.
Based on theories in human deliberation, this framework engages humans and AI in dimension-level opinion elicitation, deliberative discussion, and decision updates.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-25T14:34:06Z) - Beyond Recommender: An Exploratory Study of the Effects of Different AI
Roles in AI-Assisted Decision Making [48.179458030691286]
We examine three AI roles: Recommender, Analyzer, and Devil's Advocate.
Our results show each role's distinct strengths and limitations in task performance, reliance appropriateness, and user experience.
These insights offer valuable implications for designing AI assistants with adaptive functional roles according to different situations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-04T07:32:28Z) - Towards Effective Human-AI Decision-Making: The Role of Human Learning
in Appropriate Reliance on AI Advice [3.595471754135419]
We show the relationship between learning and appropriate reliance in an experiment with 100 participants.
This work provides fundamental concepts for analyzing reliance and derives implications for the effective design of human-AI decision-making.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-03T14:51:53Z) - The Impact of Imperfect XAI on Human-AI Decision-Making [8.305869611846775]
We evaluate how incorrect explanations influence humans' decision-making behavior in a bird species identification task.
Our findings reveal the influence of imperfect XAI and humans' level of expertise on their reliance on AI and human-AI team performance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-25T15:19:36Z) - Fairness in AI and Its Long-Term Implications on Society [68.8204255655161]
We take a closer look at AI fairness and analyze how lack of AI fairness can lead to deepening of biases over time.
We discuss how biased models can lead to more negative real-world outcomes for certain groups.
If the issues persist, they could be reinforced by interactions with other risks and have severe implications on society in the form of social unrest.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-16T11:22:59Z) - A Cognitive Framework for Delegation Between Error-Prone AI and Human
Agents [0.0]
We investigate the use of cognitively inspired models of behavior to predict the behavior of both human and AI agents.
The predicted behavior is used to delegate control between humans and AI agents through the use of an intermediary entity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-04-06T15:15:21Z) - Deciding Fast and Slow: The Role of Cognitive Biases in AI-assisted
Decision-making [46.625616262738404]
We use knowledge from the field of cognitive science to account for cognitive biases in the human-AI collaborative decision-making setting.
We focus specifically on anchoring bias, a bias commonly encountered in human-AI collaboration.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-10-15T22:25:41Z) - Effect of Confidence and Explanation on Accuracy and Trust Calibration
in AI-Assisted Decision Making [53.62514158534574]
We study whether features that reveal case-specific model information can calibrate trust and improve the joint performance of the human and AI.
We show that confidence score can help calibrate people's trust in an AI model, but trust calibration alone is not sufficient to improve AI-assisted decision making.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-01-07T15:33:48Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.