This thesis studies how to design and shape human-AI interactions to help individuals develop accurate beliefs about the AI systems so they can improve and or secure favorable outcomes at minimal cost and ensure that the AI system continues to achieve its intended objectives, such as maximizing accuracy.
Abstract
When an AI system is deployed, the individuals who use and or are evaluated by it form beliefs about how the system operates and use those beliefs to strategically present their preferences, behaviors, or attributes. The system then responds with feedback or a decision outcome, thereby creating a human-AI interaction loop. This thesis studies how to design and shape such interactions to achieve three goals: (1) help individuals develop accurate beliefs about the AI systems so they can improve and or secure favorable outcomes at minimal cost, (2) encourage improvement and or discourage gaming behaviors, and (3) ensure that the AI system continues to achieve its intended objectives, such as maximizing accuracy. To address these goals, the thesis is organized into three complementary parts that examine and study human-AI interactions from the perspectives of both evaluated individuals and AI systems. Together, the work presented in this thesis advances human-centered machine learning by providing principles and methods for designing AI systems that align with human needs, values, and capabilities. Methodologically, this thesis integrates theoretical analysis, data-driven modeling, human-subject experiments, and empirical evaluations on real-world and semi-synthetic datasets.
It is argued that current alignment approaches, including reinforcement learning from human feedback, tend to prioritize user approval and conversational fluency over behaviorally informative feedback, leading to sycophantic patterns of noncontingent affirmation.
Artificial intelligence systems can produce information that closely resembles real and human-created information, making it difficult to accurately distinguish between synthetic (AI-generated) and non-synthetic content. We explored whether individual differences in attitudes toward AI or one’s history of engagemen...
Tanaka Manhede, Yuliana Fartachuk, S. Martinez et al.· AI & SOCIETY· 0 citations
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) can improve students’ work while assistance is available, but better AI-assisted performance does not necessarily show what students have learned or can do independently. The methodological gap is that outcomes collected under different AI-access, timing, and task conditions are...
This work provides the first comprehensive empirical investigation of humans' internal models play a mediating role in feedback behaviour through a randomized controlled trial and shows that this relationship is invariant across visual contexts and is robust to three common feedback types.
Taha Shaheen, S. West, Yu Zhang· Proceedings of the Thirty-Fi...· 0 citations
Identifying and promoting effective user interaction strategies in human-AI interaction is critical to improving collaboration quality. However, what motivates users or how agent behavior affects them remains unclear. We analyzed self-reported user strategies in a study (N=60) using a collaborative game with three AI p...
Inês Lobo, Janin Koch, Jennifer Renoux et al.· Proceedings of the 26th ACM...· 0 citations
An analysis that derives task-specific algorithmic design spaces from human-designed methods, maps both human- and agent-designed methods into these spaces, and quantifies their algorithmic differences at the module level suggests that although current agents can occasionally match or surpass human SOTA performance, th...
Yikang Yang, Zhengxin Yang, Luzhou Peng et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.