Human Learning about AI
원문 초록
We study how people form expectations about the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) and consequences for AI adoption. Our main hypothesis is that people rely on human-relevant task features when evaluating AI, treating AI failures on human-easy tasks, and successes on human-difficult tasks, as highly informative of its overall performance. In lab experiments, we show that projection of human difficulty onto AI predictably distorts subjects' beliefs and can lead to suboptimal adoption, as failing human-easy tasks need not imply poor overall performance for AI. We find evidence for projection in a field experiment with an AI giving parenting advice. Potential users strongly infer from answers that are equally uninformative but less humanly-similar to expected answers, significantly reducing trust and future engagement. Our results suggest AI "anthropomorphism" can backfire by increasing projection and de-aligning people's expectations and AI performance.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
Personalized Exercise Recommendation with Semantically-Grounded Knowledge Tracing
Reasoning or Memorization? Unreliable Results of Reinforcement Learning Due to Data Contamination
A Practical Two-Stage Recipe for Mathematical LLMs: Maximizing Accuracy with SFT and Efficiency with Reinforcement Learning
The Delta Learning Hypothesis: Preference Tuning on Weak Data can Yield Strong Gains
LLMThinkBench: Towards Basic Math Reasoning and Overthinking in Large Language Models
EvoAgentX: An Automated Framework for Evolving Agentic Workflows
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.