Modeling Attention during Dimensional Shifts with Counterfactual and Delayed Feedback

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.11161v1
• Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2025 20:26:34 GMT
• Title: Modeling Attention during Dimensional Shifts with Counterfactual and Delayed Feedback
• Authors: Tyler Malloy, Roderick Seow, Cleotilde Gonzalez,
• Abstract summary: We compare two methods for modeling how humans attend to specific features of decision making tasks. We find that calculating an information theoretic metric over a history of experiences is best able to account for human-like behavior.
• Score: 0.4915744683251151
• License:
• Abstract: Attention can be used to inform choice selection in contextual bandit tasks even when context features have not been previously experienced. One example of this is in dimensional shifts, where additional feature values are introduced and the relationship between features and outcomes can either be static or variable. Attentional mechanisms have been extensively studied in contextual bandit tasks where the feedback of choices is provided immediately, but less research has been done on tasks where feedback is delayed or in counterfactual feedback cases. Some methods have successfully modeled human attention with immediate feedback based on reward prediction errors (RPEs), though recent research raises questions of the applicability of RPEs onto more general attentional mechanisms. Alternative models suggest that information theoretic metrics can be used to model human attention, with broader applications to novel stimuli. In this paper, we compare two different methods for modeling how humans attend to specific features of decision making tasks, one that is based on calculating an information theoretic metric using a memory of past experiences, and another that is based on iteratively updating attention from reward prediction errors. We compare these models using simulations in a contextual bandit task with both intradimensional and extradimensional domain shifts, as well as immediate, delayed, and counterfactual feedback. We find that calculating an information theoretic metric over a history of experiences is best able to account for human-like behavior in tasks that shift dimensions and alter feedback presentation. These results indicate that information theoretic metrics of attentional mechanisms may be better suited than RPEs to predict human attention in decision making, though further studies of human behavior are necessary to support these results.

Related papers

• Re-Visiting Explainable AI Evaluation Metrics to Identify The Most Informative Features [0.0]
  Functionality or proxy-based approach is one of the used approaches to evaluate the quality of artificial intelligence methods. Among them, Selectivity or RemOve And Retrain (ROAR), and Permutation Importance (PI) are the most commonly used metrics. We propose expected accuracy interval (EAI) to predict the upper and lower bounds of the the accuracy of the model when ROAR or IP is implemented.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-31T17:18:43Z)
• TSFeatLIME: An Online User Study in Enhancing Explainability in Univariate Time Series Forecasting [1.9314780151274307]
  This paper presents a framework - TSFeatLIME, extending TSLIME. TSFeatLIME integrates an auxiliary feature into the surrogate model and considers the pairwise Euclidean distances between the queried time series and the generated samples. Results show that the surrogate model under the TSFeatLIME framework is able to better simulate the behaviour of the black-box considering distance, without sacrificing accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-24T10:24:53Z)
• Explanatory Model Monitoring to Understand the Effects of Feature Shifts on Performance [61.06245197347139]
  We propose a novel approach to explain the behavior of a black-box model under feature shifts. We refer to our method that combines concepts from Optimal Transport and Shapley Values as Explanatory Performance Estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-24T18:28:19Z)
• Modeling User Preferences via Brain-Computer Interfacing [54.3727087164445]
  We use Brain-Computer Interfacing technology to infer users' preferences, their attentional correlates towards visual content, and their associations with affective experience. We link these to relevant applications, such as information retrieval, personalized steering of generative models, and crowdsourcing population estimates of affective experiences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-15T20:41:46Z)
• Evaluating the Utility of Model Explanations for Model Development [54.23538543168767]
  We evaluate whether explanations can improve human decision-making in practical scenarios of machine learning model development. To our surprise, we did not find evidence of significant improvement on tasks when users were provided with any of the saliency maps. These findings suggest caution regarding the usefulness and potential for misunderstanding in saliency-based explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-10T23:13:23Z)
• Causal Feature Selection via Transfer Entropy [59.999594949050596]
  Causal discovery aims to identify causal relationships between features with observational data. We introduce a new causal feature selection approach that relies on the forward and backward feature selection procedures. We provide theoretical guarantees on the regression and classification errors for both the exact and the finite-sample cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-17T08:04:45Z)
• Incorporating Heterogeneous User Behaviors and Social Influences for Predictive Analysis [32.31161268928372]
  We aim to incorporate heterogeneous user behaviors and social influences for behavior predictions. This paper proposes a variant of Long-Short Term Memory (LSTM) which can consider context while a behavior sequence. A residual learning-based decoder is designed to automatically construct multiple high-order cross features based on social behavior representation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-24T17:05:37Z)
• Explain, Edit, and Understand: Rethinking User Study Design for Evaluating Model Explanations [97.91630330328815]
  We conduct a crowdsourcing study, where participants interact with deception detection models that have been trained to distinguish between genuine and fake hotel reviews. We observe that for a linear bag-of-words model, participants with access to the feature coefficients during training are able to cause a larger reduction in model confidence in the testing phase when compared to the no-explanation control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-17T18:29:56Z)
• Models, Pixels, and Rewards: Evaluating Design Trade-offs in Visual Model-Based Reinforcement Learning [109.74041512359476]
  We study a number of design decisions for the predictive model in visual MBRL algorithms. We find that a range of design decisions that are often considered crucial, such as the use of latent spaces, have little effect on task performance. We show how this phenomenon is related to exploration and how some of the lower-scoring models on standard benchmarks will perform the same as the best-performing models when trained on the same training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-08T18:03:21Z)
• Context-Aware Attentive Knowledge Tracing [21.397976659857793]
  We propose attentive knowledge tracing, which couples flexible attention-based neural network models with a series of novel, interpretable model components. AKT uses a novel monotonic attention mechanism that relates a learner's future responses to assessment questions to their past responses. We show that AKT outperforms existing KT methods (by up to $6%$ in AUC in some cases) on predicting future learner responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-24T02:45:43Z)
• Learning Opinion Dynamics From Social Traces [25.161493874783584]
  We propose an inference mechanism for fitting a generative, agent-like model of opinion dynamics to real-world social traces. We showcase our proposal by translating a classical agent-based model of opinion dynamics into its generative counterpart. We apply our model to real-world data from Reddit to explore the long-standing question about the impact of backfire effect.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-02T14:48:17Z)

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.