Human-AI Interactions and Societal Pitfalls
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2309.10448v2
- Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2023 00:52:52 GMT
- Title: Human-AI Interactions and Societal Pitfalls
- Authors: Francisco Castro, Jian Gao, S\'ebastien Martin
- Abstract summary: When working with generative artificial intelligence (AI), users may see productivity gains, but the AI-generated content may not match their preferences exactly.
We show that the interplay between individual-level decisions and AI training may lead to societal challenges.
A solution to the homogenization and bias issues is to improve human-AI interactions, enabling personalized outputs without sacrificing productivity.
- Score: 1.6413583085553642
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: When working with generative artificial intelligence (AI), users may see
productivity gains, but the AI-generated content may not match their
preferences exactly. To study this effect, we introduce a Bayesian framework in
which heterogeneous users choose how much information to share with the AI,
facing a trade-off between output fidelity and communication cost. We show that
the interplay between these individual-level decisions and AI training may lead
to societal challenges. Outputs may become more homogenized, especially when
the AI is trained on AI-generated content. And any AI bias may become societal
bias. A solution to the homogenization and bias issues is to improve human-AI
interactions, enabling personalized outputs without sacrificing productivity.
Related papers
- Rolling in the deep of cognitive and AI biases [1.556153237434314]
We argue that there is urgent need to understand AI as a sociotechnical system, inseparable from the conditions in which it is designed, developed and deployed.
We address this critical issue by following a radical new methodology under which human cognitive biases become core entities in our AI fairness overview.
We introduce a new mapping, which justifies the humans to AI biases and we detect relevant fairness intensities and inter-dependencies.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-30T21:34:04Z) - 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) - Seamful XAI: Operationalizing Seamful Design in Explainable AI [59.89011292395202]
Mistakes in AI systems are inevitable, arising from both technical limitations and sociotechnical gaps.
We propose that seamful design can foster AI explainability by revealing sociotechnical and infrastructural mismatches.
We explore this process with 43 AI practitioners and real end-users.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-11-12T21:54:05Z) - On the Effect of Information Asymmetry in Human-AI Teams [0.0]
We focus on the existence of complementarity potential between humans and AI.
Specifically, we identify information asymmetry as an essential source of complementarity potential.
By conducting an online experiment, we demonstrate that humans can use such contextual information to adjust the AI's decision.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-05-03T13:02:50Z) - On the Influence of Explainable AI on Automation Bias [0.0]
We aim to shed light on the potential to influence automation bias by explainable AI (XAI)
We conduct an online experiment with regard to hotel review classifications and discuss first results.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-04-19T12:54:23Z) - Cybertrust: From Explainable to Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) [58.981120701284816]
Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) will incorporate explicit quantifications and visualizations of user confidence in AI recommendations.
It will allow examining and testing of AI system predictions to establish a basis for trust in the systems' decision making.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-01-26T18:53:09Z) - Building Bridges: Generative Artworks to Explore AI Ethics [56.058588908294446]
In recent years, there has been an increased emphasis on understanding and mitigating adverse impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies on society.
A significant challenge in the design of ethical AI systems is that there are multiple stakeholders in the AI pipeline, each with their own set of constraints and interests.
This position paper outlines some potential ways in which generative artworks can play this role by serving as accessible and powerful educational tools.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-25T22:31:55Z) - Is the Most Accurate AI the Best Teammate? Optimizing AI for Teamwork [54.309495231017344]
We argue that AI systems should be trained in a human-centered manner, directly optimized for team performance.
We study this proposal for a specific type of human-AI teaming, where the human overseer chooses to either accept the AI recommendation or solve the task themselves.
Our experiments with linear and non-linear models on real-world, high-stakes datasets show that the most accuracy AI may not lead to highest team performance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-04-27T19:06:28Z) - 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.