Modeling the quantum-like dynamics of human reliability ratings in Human-AI interactions by interaction dependent Hamiltonians

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.13918v1
• Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 03:23:00 GMT
• Title: Modeling the quantum-like dynamics of human reliability ratings in Human-AI interactions by interaction dependent Hamiltonians
• Authors: Johan van der Meer, Pamela Hoyte, Luisa Roeder, Peter Bruza,
• Abstract summary: We explore the ability of Quantum Random Walk models to model the dynamics of trust in human-AI interactions.<n>We find that using empirical parameters to inform the use of different Hamiltonians can provide a promising means to model the evolution of trust in Human-AI interactions.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: As our information environments become ever more powered by artificial intelligence (AI), the phenomenon of trust in a human's interactions with this intelligence is becoming increasingly pertinent. For example, in the not too distant future, there will be teams of humans and intelligent robots involved in dealing with the repercussions of high-risk disaster situations such as hurricanes, earthquakes, or nuclear accidents. Even in such conditions of high uncertainty, humans and intelligent machines will need to engage in shared decision making, and trust is fundamental to the effectiveness of these interactions. A key challenge in modeling the dynamics of this trust is to provide a means to incorporate sensitivity to fluctuations in human trust judgments. In this article, we explore the ability of Quantum Random Walk models to model the dynamics of trust in human-AI interactions, and to integrate a sensitivity to fluctuations in participant trust judgments based on the nature of the interaction with the AI. We found that using empirical parameters to inform the use of different Hamiltonians can provide a promising means to model the evolution of trust in Human-AI interactions.

Related papers

• Measurement of LLM's Philosophies of Human Nature [113.47929131143766]
  We design the standardized psychological scale specifically targeting large language models (LLM)<n>We show that current LLMs exhibit a systemic lack of trust in humans.<n>We propose a mental loop learning framework, which enables LLM to continuously optimize its value system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-03T06:22:19Z)
• What Human-Horse Interactions may Teach us About Effective Human-AI Interactions [0.5893124686141781]
  We argue that AI, like horses, should complement rather than replace human capabilities.<n>We analyze key elements of human-horse relationships: trust, communication, and mutual adaptability.<n>We offer a vision for designing AI systems that are trustworthy, adaptable, and capable of fostering symbiotic human-AI partnerships.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-18T00:39:16Z)
• Approximating Human Models During Argumentation-based Dialogues [4.178382980763478]
  Key challenge in Explainable AI Planning (XAIP) is model reconciliation. We propose a novel framework that enables AI agents to learn and update a probabilistic human model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-28T23:22:18Z)
• Human-AI Safety: A Descendant of Generative AI and Control Systems Safety [6.100304850888953]
  We argue that meaningful safety assurances for advanced AI technologies require reasoning about how the feedback loop formed by AI outputs and human behavior may drive the interaction towards different outcomes. We propose a concrete technical roadmap towards next-generation human-centered AI safety.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-16T03:52:00Z)
• Trust in AI: Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions [6.724854390957174]
  The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems in our daily life explains the significance of trust/distrust in AI from a user perspective. Trust/distrust in AI plays the role of a regulator and could significantly control the level of this diffusion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-12T20:26:49Z)
• Common (good) practices measuring trust in HRI [55.2480439325792]
  Trust in robots is widely believed to be imperative for the adoption of robots into people's daily lives. Researchers have been exploring how people trust robot in different ways. Most roboticists agree that insufficient levels of trust lead to a risk of disengagement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-20T20:52:10Z)
• The Generative AI Paradox: "What It Can Create, It May Not Understand" [81.89252713236746]
  Recent wave of generative AI has sparked excitement and concern over potentially superhuman levels of artificial intelligence. At the same time, models still show basic errors in understanding that would not be expected even in non-expert humans. This presents us with an apparent paradox: how do we reconcile seemingly superhuman capabilities with the persistence of errors that few humans would make?
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-31T18:07:07Z)
• Data-driven emotional body language generation for social robotics [58.88028813371423]
  In social robotics, endowing humanoid robots with the ability to generate bodily expressions of affect can improve human-robot interaction and collaboration. We implement a deep learning data-driven framework that learns from a few hand-designed robotic bodily expressions. The evaluation study found that the anthropomorphism and animacy of the generated expressions are not perceived differently from the hand-designed ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-02T09:21:39Z)
• Trust as Extended Control: Active Inference and User Feedback During Human-Robot Collaboration [2.6381163133447836]
  Despite its crucial role, it is largely unknown how trust emerges, develops, and supports human interactions with nonhuman artefacts. We introduce a model of trust as an agent's best explanation for reliable sensory exchange with an extended motor plant or partner. We examine the role of shared behavior in the genesis of trust, especially in the context of dyadic collaboration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-22T16:11:22Z)
• Formalizing Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Prerequisites, Causes and Goals of Human Trust in AI [55.4046755826066]
  We discuss a model of trust inspired by, but not identical to, sociology's interpersonal trust (i.e., trust between people) We incorporate a formalization of 'contractual trust', such that trust between a user and an AI is trust that some implicit or explicit contract will hold. We discuss how to design trustworthy AI, how to evaluate whether trust has manifested, and whether it is warranted.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-15T03:07:23Z)
• 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.