Knowledge-augmented Risk Assessment (KaRA): a hybrid-intelligence framework for supporting knowledge-intensive risk assessment of prospect candidates

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.05288v1
• Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 14:32:11 GMT
• Title: Knowledge-augmented Risk Assessment (KaRA): a hybrid-intelligence framework for supporting knowledge-intensive risk assessment of prospect candidates
• Authors: Carlos Raoni Mendes, Emilio Vital Brazil, Vinicius Segura, and Renato Cerqueira
• Abstract summary: In many contexts, assessing the Probability of Success (PoS) of prospects heavily depends on experts' knowledge, often leading to biased and inconsistent assessments. We have developed the framework named KARA to address these issues. It combines multiple AI techniques that consider SMEs (Subject Matter Experts) feedback on top of a structured domain knowledge-base to support risk assessment processes of prospect candidates.
• Score: 2.3311636727756055
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Evaluating the potential of a prospective candidate is a common task in multiple decision-making processes in different industries. We refer to a prospect as something or someone that could potentially produce positive results in a given context, e.g., an area where an oil company could find oil, a compound that, when synthesized, results in a material with required properties, and so on. In many contexts, assessing the Probability of Success (PoS) of prospects heavily depends on experts' knowledge, often leading to biased and inconsistent assessments. We have developed the framework named KARA (Knowledge-augmented Risk Assessment) to address these issues. It combines multiple AI techniques that consider SMEs (Subject Matter Experts) feedback on top of a structured domain knowledge-base to support risk assessment processes of prospect candidates in knowledge-intensive contexts.

Related papers

• Privacy Risks of General-Purpose AI Systems: A Foundation for Investigating Practitioner Perspectives [47.17703009473386]
  Powerful AI models have led to impressive leaps in performance across a wide range of tasks. Privacy concerns have led to a wealth of literature covering various privacy risks and vulnerabilities of AI models. We conduct a systematic review of these survey papers to provide a concise and usable overview of privacy risks in GPAIS.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T07:49:48Z)
• Risk Analysis in the Selection of Project Managers Based on ANP and FMEA [0.0]
  This research aims to identify risks in selecting project managers for civil engineering projects, utilizing a combined ANP-FMEA approach. The results highlighted that the lack of political influence, absence of construction experience, and deficiency in project management expertise represent the most substantial risks in selecting a project manager.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-06T16:08:10Z)
• Trustworthy, responsible, ethical AI in manufacturing and supply chains: synthesis and emerging research questions [59.34177693293227]
  We explore the applicability of responsible, ethical, and trustworthy AI within the context of manufacturing. We then use a broadened adaptation of a machine learning lifecycle to discuss, through the use of illustrative examples, how each step may result in a given AI trustworthiness concern.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-19T10:43:06Z)
• Quantitative AI Risk Assessments: Opportunities and Challenges [9.262092738841979]
  AI-based systems are increasingly being leveraged to provide value to organizations, individuals, and society. Risks have led to proposed regulations, litigation, and general societal concerns. This paper explores the concept of a quantitative AI Risk Assessment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-13T21:47:25Z)
• Uncertainty-Driven Action Quality Assessment [67.20617610820857]
  We propose a novel probabilistic model, named Uncertainty-Driven AQA (UD-AQA), to capture the diversity among multiple judge scores. We generate the estimation of uncertainty for each prediction, which is employed to re-weight AQA regression loss. Our proposed method achieves competitive results on three benchmarks including the Olympic events MTL-AQA and FineDiving, and the surgical skill JIGSAWS datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-29T07:21:15Z)
• A Unified End-to-End Retriever-Reader Framework for Knowledge-based VQA [67.75989848202343]
  This paper presents a unified end-to-end retriever-reader framework towards knowledge-based VQA. We shed light on the multi-modal implicit knowledge from vision-language pre-training models to mine its potential in knowledge reasoning. Our scheme is able to not only provide guidance for knowledge retrieval, but also drop these instances potentially error-prone towards question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-30T02:35:04Z)
• A Survey of Risk-Aware Multi-Armed Bandits [84.67376599822569]
  We review various risk measures of interest, and comment on their properties. We consider algorithms for the regret minimization setting, where the exploration-exploitation trade-off manifests. We conclude by commenting on persisting challenges and fertile areas for future research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-12T02:20:34Z)
• Towards a multi-stakeholder value-based assessment framework for algorithmic systems [76.79703106646967]
  We develop a value-based assessment framework that visualizes closeness and tensions between values. We give guidelines on how to operationalize them, while opening up the evaluation and deliberation process to a wide range of stakeholders.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-09T19:28:32Z)
• Look Before You Leap! Designing a Human-Centered AI System for Change Risk Assessment [0.5741525024018875]
  Change management is a promising sub-field in operations that manages and reviews the changes to be deployed in production in a systematic manner. It is practically impossible to manually review a large number of changes on a daily basis and assess the risk associated with them. There are a few commercial solutions available to address this problem but those solutions lack the ability to incorporate domain knowledge and continuous feedback from domain experts into the risk assessment process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-18T02:41:48Z)
• What's a Good Prediction? Challenges in evaluating an agent's knowledge [0.9281671380673306]
  We show the conflict between accuracy and usefulness of general knowledge. We propose an alternate evaluation approach that arises continually in the online continual learning setting. This paper contributes a first look into evaluation of predictions through their use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-23T21:44:43Z)

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.