Underspecified Human Decision Experiments Considered Harmful
원문 초록
Decision-making with information displays is a key focus of research in areas like human-AI collaboration and data visualization. However, what constitutes a decision problem, and what is required for an experiment to conclude that decisions are flawed, remain imprecise. We present a widely applicable definition of a decision problem synthesized from statistical decision theory and information economics. We claim that to attribute loss in human performance to bias, an experiment must provide the information that a rational agent would need to identify the normative decision. We evaluate whether recent empirical research on AI-assisted decisions achieves this standard. We find that only 10 (26%) of 39 studies that claim to identify biased behavior presented participants with sufficient information to make this claim in at least one treatment condition. We motivate the value of studying well-defined decision problems by describing a characterization of performance losses they allow to be conceived.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
Improving Fairness of Large Language Models in Multi-document Summarization
An Empirical Study of Bugs in Data Visualization Libraries
Fair for a few: Improving Fairness in Doubly Imbalanced Datasets
Multi-modal Siamese Network for Entity Alignment
Explainable Debugger for Black-box Machine Learning Models
Graph-Structured Data Analysis of Component Failure in Autonomous Cargo Ships Based on Feature Fusion
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.