Fine-Grained Appropriate Reliance: Human-AI Collaboration with a Multi-Step Transparent Decision Workflow for Complex Task Decomposition

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.10909v1
• Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2025 01:03:09 GMT
• Title: Fine-Grained Appropriate Reliance: Human-AI Collaboration with a Multi-Step Transparent Decision Workflow for Complex Task Decomposition
• Authors: Gaole He, Patrick Hemmer, Michael Vössing, Max Schemmer, Ujwal Gadiraju,
• Abstract summary: We propose to investigate the impact of a novel Multi-Step Transparent (MST) decision workflow on user reliance behaviors. Our findings demonstrate that human-AI collaboration with an MST decision workflow can outperform one-step collaboration in specific contexts. Our work highlights that there is no one-size-fits-all decision workflow that can help obtain optimal human-AI collaboration.
• Score: 14.413413322901409
• License:
• Abstract: In recent years, the rapid development of AI systems has brought about the benefits of intelligent services but also concerns about security and reliability. By fostering appropriate user reliance on an AI system, both complementary team performance and reduced human workload can be achieved. Previous empirical studies have extensively analyzed the impact of factors ranging from task, system, and human behavior on user trust and appropriate reliance in the context of one-step decision making. However, user reliance on AI systems in tasks with complex semantics that require multi-step workflows remains under-explored. Inspired by recent work on task decomposition with large language models, we propose to investigate the impact of a novel Multi-Step Transparent (MST) decision workflow on user reliance behaviors. We conducted an empirical study (N = 233) of AI-assisted decision making in composite fact-checking tasks (i.e., fact-checking tasks that entail multiple sub-fact verification steps). Our findings demonstrate that human-AI collaboration with an MST decision workflow can outperform one-step collaboration in specific contexts (e.g., when advice from an AI system is misleading). Further analysis of the appropriate reliance at fine-grained levels indicates that an MST decision workflow can be effective when users demonstrate a relatively high consideration of the intermediate steps. Our work highlights that there is no one-size-fits-all decision workflow that can help obtain optimal human-AI collaboration. Our insights help deepen the understanding of the role of decision workflows in facilitating appropriate reliance. We synthesize important implications for designing effective means to facilitate appropriate reliance on AI systems in composite tasks, positioning opportunities for the human-centered AI and broader HCI communities.

Related papers

• Interactive Agents to Overcome Ambiguity in Software Engineering [61.40183840499932]
  AI agents are increasingly being deployed to automate tasks, often based on ambiguous and underspecified user instructions. Making unwarranted assumptions and failing to ask clarifying questions can lead to suboptimal outcomes. We study the ability of LLM agents to handle ambiguous instructions in interactive code generation settings by evaluating proprietary and open-weight models on their performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T17:12:26Z)
• Collaborative Gym: A Framework for Enabling and Evaluating Human-Agent Collaboration [51.452664740963066]
  Collaborative Gym is a framework enabling asynchronous, tripartite interaction among agents, humans, and task environments. We instantiate Co-Gym with three representative tasks in both simulated and real-world conditions. Our findings reveal that collaborative agents consistently outperform their fully autonomous counterparts in task performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T09:21:15Z)
• To Err Is AI! Debugging as an Intervention to Facilitate Appropriate Reliance on AI Systems [11.690126756498223]
  Vision for optimal human-AI collaboration requires 'appropriate reliance' of humans on AI systems. In practice, the performance disparity of machine learning models on out-of-distribution data makes dataset-specific performance feedback unreliable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-22T09:43:27Z)
• Mutual Theory of Mind in Human-AI Collaboration: An Empirical Study with LLM-driven AI Agents in a Real-time Shared Workspace Task [56.92961847155029]
  Theory of Mind (ToM) significantly impacts human collaboration and communication as a crucial capability to understand others. Mutual Theory of Mind (MToM) arises when AI agents with ToM capability collaborate with humans. We find that the agent's ToM capability does not significantly impact team performance but enhances human understanding of the agent.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-13T13:19:48Z)
• Large Language Model-based Human-Agent Collaboration for Complex Task Solving [94.3914058341565]
  We introduce the problem of Large Language Models (LLMs)-based human-agent collaboration for complex task-solving. We propose a Reinforcement Learning-based Human-Agent Collaboration method, ReHAC. This approach includes a policy model designed to determine the most opportune stages for human intervention within the task-solving process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T11:03:36Z)
• The Foundations of Computational Management: A Systematic Approach to Task Automation for the Integration of Artificial Intelligence into Existing Workflows [55.2480439325792]
  This article introduces Computational Management, a systematic approach to task automation. The article offers three easy step-by-step procedures to begin the process of implementing AI within a workflow.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-07T01:45:14Z)
• Human Delegation Behavior in Human-AI Collaboration: The Effect of Contextual Information [7.475784495279183]
  One promising approach to leverage existing complementary capabilities is allowing humans to delegate individual instances of decision tasks to AI. We conduct a behavioral study to explore the effects of providing contextual information to support this delegation decision. Our findings reveal that access to contextual information significantly improves human-AI team performance in delegation settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-09T18:59:47Z)
• Optimising Human-AI Collaboration by Learning Convincing Explanations [62.81395661556852]
  We propose a method for a collaborative system that remains safe by having a human making decisions. Ardent enables efficient and effective decision-making by adapting to individual preferences for explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-13T16:00:16Z)
• Confounding-Robust Policy Improvement with Human-AI Teams [9.823906892919746]
  We propose a novel solution to address unobserved confounding in human-AI collaboration by employing the marginal sensitivity model (MSM) Our approach combines domain expertise with AI-driven statistical modeling to account for potential confounders that may otherwise remain hidden.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-13T02:39:52Z)
• Human-AI Collaboration: The Effect of AI Delegation on Human Task Performance and Task Satisfaction [0.0]
  We show that task performance and task satisfaction improve through AI delegation. We identify humans' increased levels of self-efficacy as the underlying mechanism for these improvements. Our findings provide initial evidence that allowing AI models to take over more management responsibilities can be an effective form of human-AI collaboration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-16T11:02:46Z)

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.