Controllable Complementarity: Subjective Preferences in Human-AI Collaboration

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.05455v1
• Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2025 14:27:48 GMT
• Title: Controllable Complementarity: Subjective Preferences in Human-AI Collaboration
• Authors: Chase McDonald, Cleotilde Gonzalez,
• Abstract summary: We investigate human preferences for controllability in a shared task with AI partners using Behavior Shaping (BS), a reinforcement learning algorithm.<n>Our findings highlight the need to design AI that prioritizes both task performance and subjective human preferences.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Research on human-AI collaboration often prioritizes objective performance. However, understanding human subjective preferences is essential to improving human-AI complementarity and human experiences. We investigate human preferences for controllability in a shared workspace task with AI partners using Behavior Shaping (BS), a reinforcement learning algorithm that allows humans explicit control over AI behavior. In one experiment, we validate the robustness of BS in producing effective AI policies relative to self-play policies, when controls are hidden. In another experiment, we enable human control, showing that participants perceive AI partners as more effective and enjoyable when they can directly dictate AI behavior. Our findings highlight the need to design AI that prioritizes both task performance and subjective human preferences. By aligning AI behavior with human preferences, we demonstrate how human-AI complementarity can extend beyond objective outcomes to include subjective preferences.

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)
• Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment: A Systematic Review for Clarifications, Framework, and Future Directions [101.67121669727354]
  Recent advancements in AI have highlighted the importance of guiding AI systems towards the intended goals, ethical principles, and values of individuals and groups, a concept broadly recognized as alignment. The lack of clarified definitions and scopes of human-AI alignment poses a significant obstacle, hampering collaborative efforts across research domains to achieve this alignment. We introduce a systematic review of over 400 papers published between 2019 and January 2024, spanning multiple domains such as Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), Natural Language Processing (NLP), Machine Learning (ML)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T16:03:25Z)
• On the Utility of Accounting for Human Beliefs about AI Intention in Human-AI Collaboration [9.371527955300323]
  We develop a model of human beliefs that captures how humans interpret and reason about their AI partner's intentions. We create an AI agent that incorporates both human behavior and human beliefs when devising its strategy for interacting with humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-10T06:39:37Z)
• 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)
• Applying HCAI in developing effective human-AI teaming: A perspective from human-AI joint cognitive systems [10.746728034149989]
  Research and application have used human-AI teaming (HAT) as a new paradigm to develop AI systems. We elaborate on our proposed conceptual framework of human-AI joint cognitive systems (HAIJCS) We propose a conceptual framework of human-AI joint cognitive systems (HAIJCS) to represent and implement HAT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-08T06:26:38Z)
• Learning to Influence Human Behavior with Offline Reinforcement Learning [70.7884839812069]
  We focus on influence in settings where there is a need to capture human suboptimality. Experiments online with humans is potentially unsafe, and creating a high-fidelity simulator of the environment is often impractical. We show that offline reinforcement learning can learn to effectively influence suboptimal humans by extending and combining elements of observed human-human behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-03T23:41:55Z)
• Learning Complementary Policies for Human-AI Teams [22.13683008398939]
  We propose a framework for a novel human-AI collaboration for selecting advantageous course of action. Our solution aims to exploit the human-AI complementarity to maximize decision rewards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-06T17:22:18Z)
• PECAN: Leveraging Policy Ensemble for Context-Aware Zero-Shot Human-AI Coordination [52.991211077362586]
  We propose a policy ensemble method to increase the diversity of partners in the population. We then develop a context-aware method enabling the ego agent to analyze and identify the partner's potential policy primitives. In this way, the ego agent is able to learn more universal cooperative behaviors for collaborating with diverse partners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-16T12:14:58Z)
• Human Decision Makings on Curriculum Reinforcement Learning with Difficulty Adjustment [52.07473934146584]
  We guide the curriculum reinforcement learning results towards a preferred performance level that is neither too hard nor too easy via learning from the human decision process. Our system is highly parallelizable, making it possible for a human to train large-scale reinforcement learning applications. It shows reinforcement learning performance can successfully adjust in sync with the human desired difficulty level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-04T23:53:51Z)
• 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)
• Trustworthy AI: A Computational Perspective [54.80482955088197]
  We focus on six of the most crucial dimensions in achieving trustworthy AI: (i) Safety & Robustness, (ii) Non-discrimination & Fairness, (iii) Explainability, (iv) Privacy, (v) Accountability & Auditability, and (vi) Environmental Well-Being. For each dimension, we review the recent related technologies according to a taxonomy and summarize their applications in real-world systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-12T14:21:46Z)

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.