Showing 1–13 of 13 results for author: Benz, C

Canonical Autoregressive Generation

Authors: Ivi Chatzi, Nina Corvelo Benz, Stratis Tsirtsis, Manuel Gomez-Rodriguez

Abstract: State of the art large language models are trained using large amounts of tokens derived from raw text using what is called a tokenizer. Crucially, the tokenizer determines the (token) vocabulary a model will use during inference as well as, in principle, the (token) language. This is because, while the token vocabulary may allow for different tokenizations of a string, the tokenizer always maps t… ▽ More State of the art large language models are trained using large amounts of tokens derived from raw text using what is called a tokenizer. Crucially, the tokenizer determines the (token) vocabulary a model will use during inference as well as, in principle, the (token) language. This is because, while the token vocabulary may allow for different tokenizations of a string, the tokenizer always maps the string to only one of these tokenizations--the canonical tokenization. However, multiple lines of empirical evidence suggest that large language models do not always generate canonical token sequences, and this comes with several negative consequences. In this work, we first show that, to generate a canonical token sequence, a model needs to generate (partial) canonical token sequences at each step of the autoregressive generation process underpinning its functioning. Building upon this theoretical result, we introduce canonical sampling, a simple and efficient sampling method that precludes a given model from generating non-canonical token sequences. Further, we also show that, in comparison with standard sampling, the distribution of token sequences generated using canonical sampling is provably closer to the true distribution of token sequences used during training. △ Less

Submitted 6 June, 2025; originally announced June 2025.

Evaluation of Large Language Models via Coupled Token Generation

Authors: Nina Corvelo Benz, Stratis Tsirtsis, Eleni Straitouri, Ivi Chatzi, Ander Artola Velasco, Suhas Thejaswi, Manuel Gomez-Rodriguez

Abstract: State of the art large language models rely on randomization to respond to a prompt. As an immediate consequence, a model may respond differently to the same prompt if asked multiple times. In this work, we argue that the evaluation and ranking of large language models should control for the randomization underpinning their functioning. Our starting point is the development of a causal model for c… ▽ More State of the art large language models rely on randomization to respond to a prompt. As an immediate consequence, a model may respond differently to the same prompt if asked multiple times. In this work, we argue that the evaluation and ranking of large language models should control for the randomization underpinning their functioning. Our starting point is the development of a causal model for coupled autoregressive generation, which allows different large language models to sample responses with the same source of randomness. Building upon our causal model, we first show that, on evaluations based on benchmark datasets, coupled autoregressive generation leads to the same conclusions as vanilla autoregressive generation but using provably fewer samples. However, we further show that, on evaluations based on (human) pairwise comparisons, coupled and vanilla autoregressive generation can surprisingly lead to different rankings when comparing more than two models, even with an infinite amount of samples. This suggests that the apparent advantage of a model over others in existing evaluation protocols may not be genuine but rather confounded by the randomness inherent to the generation process. To illustrate and complement our theoretical results, we conduct experiments with several large language models from the Llama family. We find that, across multiple knowledge areas from the popular MMLU benchmark dataset, coupled autoregressive generation requires up to 40% fewer samples to reach the same conclusions as vanilla autoregressive generation. Further, using data from the LMSYS Chatbot Arena platform, we find that the win-rates derived from pairwise comparisons by a strong large language model to prompts differ under coupled and vanilla autoregressive generation. △ Less

Submitted 3 February, 2025; originally announced February 2025.

Human-Alignment Influences the Utility of AI-assisted Decision Making

Authors: Nina L. Corvelo Benz, Manuel Gomez Rodriguez

Abstract: Whenever an AI model is used to predict a relevant (binary) outcome in AI-assisted decision making, it is widely agreed that, together with each prediction, the model should provide an AI confidence value. However, it has been unclear why decision makers have often difficulties to develop a good sense on when to trust a prediction using AI confidence values. Very recently, Corvelo Benz and Gomez R… ▽ More Whenever an AI model is used to predict a relevant (binary) outcome in AI-assisted decision making, it is widely agreed that, together with each prediction, the model should provide an AI confidence value. However, it has been unclear why decision makers have often difficulties to develop a good sense on when to trust a prediction using AI confidence values. Very recently, Corvelo Benz and Gomez Rodriguez have argued that, for rational decision makers, the utility of AI-assisted decision making is inherently bounded by the degree of alignment between the AI confidence values and the decision maker's confidence on their own predictions. In this work, we empirically investigate to what extent the degree of alignment actually influences the utility of AI-assisted decision making. To this end, we design and run a large-scale human subject study (n=703) where participants solve a simple decision making task - an online card game - assisted by an AI model with a steerable degree of alignment. Our results show a positive association between the degree of alignment and the utility of AI-assisted decision making. In addition, our results also show that post-processing the AI confidence values to achieve multicalibration with respect to the participants' confidence on their own predictions increases both the degree of alignment and the utility of AI-assisted decision making. △ Less

Submitted 23 January, 2025; originally announced January 2025.

Counterfactual Token Generation in Large Language Models

Authors: Ivi Chatzi, Nina Corvelo Benz, Eleni Straitouri, Stratis Tsirtsis, Manuel Gomez-Rodriguez

Abstract: "Sure, I am happy to generate a story for you: Captain Lyra stood at the helm of her trusty ship, the Maelstrom's Fury, gazing out at the endless sea. [...] Lyra's eyes welled up with tears as she realized the bitter truth - she had sacrificed everything for fleeting riches, and lost the love of her crew, her family, and herself." Although this story, generated by a large language model, is captiv… ▽ More "Sure, I am happy to generate a story for you: Captain Lyra stood at the helm of her trusty ship, the Maelstrom's Fury, gazing out at the endless sea. [...] Lyra's eyes welled up with tears as she realized the bitter truth - she had sacrificed everything for fleeting riches, and lost the love of her crew, her family, and herself." Although this story, generated by a large language model, is captivating, one may wonder -- how would the story have unfolded if the model had chosen "Captain Maeve" as the protagonist instead? We cannot know. State-of-the-art large language models are stateless -- they maintain no internal memory or state. Given a prompt, they generate a sequence of tokens as an output using an autoregressive process. As a consequence, they cannot reason about counterfactual alternatives to tokens they have generated in the past. In this work, our goal is to enhance them with this functionality. To this end, we develop a causal model of token generation that builds upon the Gumbel-Max structural causal model. Our model allows any large language model to perform counterfactual token generation at almost no cost in comparison with vanilla token generation, it is embarrassingly simple to implement, and it does not require any fine-tuning nor prompt engineering. We implement our model on Llama 3 8B-Instruct and Ministral-8B-Instruct and conduct a qualitative and a quantitative analysis of counterfactually generated text. We conclude with a demonstrative application of counterfactual token generation for bias detection, unveiling interesting insights about the model of the world constructed by large language models. △ Less

Submitted 24 March, 2025; v1 submitted 25 September, 2024; originally announced September 2024.

Comments: Accepted at CLeaR 2025

Matchings, Predictions and Counterfactual Harm in Refugee Resettlement Processes

Authors: Seungeon Lee, Nina Corvelo Benz, Suhas Thejaswi, Manuel Gomez-Rodriguez

Abstract: Resettlement agencies have started to adopt data-driven algorithmic matching to match refugees to locations using employment rate as a measure of utility. Given a pool of refugees, data-driven algorithmic matching utilizes a classifier to predict the probability that each refugee would find employment at any given location. Then, it uses the predicted probabilities to estimate the expected utility… ▽ More Resettlement agencies have started to adopt data-driven algorithmic matching to match refugees to locations using employment rate as a measure of utility. Given a pool of refugees, data-driven algorithmic matching utilizes a classifier to predict the probability that each refugee would find employment at any given location. Then, it uses the predicted probabilities to estimate the expected utility of all possible placement decisions. Finally, it finds the placement decisions that maximize the predicted utility by solving a maximum weight bipartite matching problem. In this work, we argue that, using existing solutions, there may be pools of refugees for which data-driven algorithmic matching is (counterfactually) harmful -- it would have achieved lower utility than a given default policy used in the past, had it been used. Then, we develop a post-processing algorithm that, given placement decisions made by a default policy on a pool of refugees and their employment outcomes, solves an inverse~matching problem to minimally modify the predictions made by a given classifier. Under these modified predictions, the optimal matching policy that maximizes predicted utility on the pool is guaranteed to be not harmful. Further, we introduce a Transformer model that, given placement decisions made by a default policy on multiple pools of refugees and their employment outcomes, learns to modify the predictions made by a classifier so that the optimal matching policy that maximizes predicted utility under the modified predictions on an unseen pool of refugees is less likely to be harmful than under the original predictions. Experiments on simulated resettlement processes using synthetic refugee data created from a variety of publicly available data suggest that our methodology may be effective in making algorithmic placement decisions that are less likely to be harmful than existing solutions. △ Less

Submitted 24 May, 2024; originally announced July 2024.

Comments: 24 pages including reference and appendix

ENSTRECT: A Stage-based Approach to 2.5D Structural Damage Detection

Authors: Christian Benz, Volker Rodehorst

Abstract: To effectively assess structural damage, it is essential to localize the instances of damage in the physical world of a civil structure. ENSTRECT is a stage-based approach designed to accomplish 2.5D structural damage detection. The method requires an image collection, the relative orientation, and a point cloud. Using these inputs, surface damages are segmented at the image level and then mapped… ▽ More To effectively assess structural damage, it is essential to localize the instances of damage in the physical world of a civil structure. ENSTRECT is a stage-based approach designed to accomplish 2.5D structural damage detection. The method requires an image collection, the relative orientation, and a point cloud. Using these inputs, surface damages are segmented at the image level and then mapped into the point cloud space, resulting in a segmented point cloud. To enable further quantitative analyses, the segmented point cloud is transformed into measurable damage instances: cracks are extracted by contracting the clustered point cloud into a corresponding medial axis. For areal damages, such as spalling and corrosion, a procedure is proposed to compute the bounding polygon based on PCA and alpha shapes. With a localization tolerance of 4cm, ENSTRECT can achieve IoUs of over 90% for cracks, 82% for corrosion, and 41% for spalling. Detection at the instance level yields an AP50 of about 45% (cracks, spalling) and 56% (corrosion). △ Less

Submitted 2 October, 2024; v1 submitted 6 January, 2024; originally announced January 2024.

Drawing the Same Bounding Box Twice? Coping Noisy Annotations in Object Detection with Repeated Labels

Authors: David Tschirschwitz, Christian Benz, Morris Florek, Henrik Norderhus, Benno Stein, Volker Rodehorst

Abstract: The reliability of supervised machine learning systems depends on the accuracy and availability of ground truth labels. However, the process of human annotation, being prone to error, introduces the potential for noisy labels, which can impede the practicality of these systems. While training with noisy labels is a significant consideration, the reliability of test data is also crucial to ascertai… ▽ More The reliability of supervised machine learning systems depends on the accuracy and availability of ground truth labels. However, the process of human annotation, being prone to error, introduces the potential for noisy labels, which can impede the practicality of these systems. While training with noisy labels is a significant consideration, the reliability of test data is also crucial to ascertain the dependability of the results. A common approach to addressing this issue is repeated labeling, where multiple annotators label the same example, and their labels are combined to provide a better estimate of the true label. In this paper, we propose a novel localization algorithm that adapts well-established ground truth estimation methods for object detection and instance segmentation tasks. The key innovation of our method lies in its ability to transform combined localization and classification tasks into classification-only problems, thus enabling the application of techniques such as Expectation-Maximization (EM) or Majority Voting (MJV). Although our main focus is the aggregation of unique ground truth for test data, our algorithm also shows superior performance during training on the TexBiG dataset, surpassing both noisy label training and label aggregation using Weighted Boxes Fusion (WBF). Our experiments indicate that the benefits of repeated labels emerge under specific dataset and annotation configurations. The key factors appear to be (1) dataset complexity, the (2) annotator consistency, and (3) the given annotation budget constraints. △ Less

Submitted 18 September, 2023; originally announced September 2023.

Human-Aligned Calibration for AI-Assisted Decision Making

Authors: Nina L. Corvelo Benz, Manuel Gomez Rodriguez

Abstract: Whenever a binary classifier is used to provide decision support, it typically provides both a label prediction and a confidence value. Then, the decision maker is supposed to use the confidence value to calibrate how much to trust the prediction. In this context, it has been often argued that the confidence value should correspond to a well calibrated estimate of the probability that the predicte… ▽ More Whenever a binary classifier is used to provide decision support, it typically provides both a label prediction and a confidence value. Then, the decision maker is supposed to use the confidence value to calibrate how much to trust the prediction. In this context, it has been often argued that the confidence value should correspond to a well calibrated estimate of the probability that the predicted label matches the ground truth label. However, multiple lines of empirical evidence suggest that decision makers have difficulties at developing a good sense on when to trust a prediction using these confidence values. In this paper, our goal is first to understand why and then investigate how to construct more useful confidence values. We first argue that, for a broad class of utility functions, there exist data distributions for which a rational decision maker is, in general, unlikely to discover the optimal decision policy using the above confidence values -- an optimal decision maker would need to sometimes place more (less) trust on predictions with lower (higher) confidence values. However, we then show that, if the confidence values satisfy a natural alignment property with respect to the decision maker's confidence on her own predictions, there always exists an optimal decision policy under which the level of trust the decision maker would need to place on predictions is monotone on the confidence values, facilitating its discoverability. Further, we show that multicalibration with respect to the decision maker's confidence on her own predictions is a sufficient condition for alignment. Experiments on four different AI-assisted decision making tasks where a classifier provides decision support to real human experts validate our theoretical results and suggest that alignment may lead to better decisions. △ Less

Submitted 23 February, 2024; v1 submitted 31 May, 2023; originally announced June 2023.

Appropriate Reliance on AI Advice: Conceptualization and the Effect of Explanations

Authors: Max Schemmer, Niklas Kühl, Carina Benz, Andrea Bartos, Gerhard Satzger

Abstract: AI advice is becoming increasingly popular, e.g., in investment and medical treatment decisions. As this advice is typically imperfect, decision-makers have to exert discretion as to whether actually follow that advice: they have to "appropriately" rely on correct and turn down incorrect advice. However, current research on appropriate reliance still lacks a common definition as well as an operati… ▽ More AI advice is becoming increasingly popular, e.g., in investment and medical treatment decisions. As this advice is typically imperfect, decision-makers have to exert discretion as to whether actually follow that advice: they have to "appropriately" rely on correct and turn down incorrect advice. However, current research on appropriate reliance still lacks a common definition as well as an operational measurement concept. Additionally, no in-depth behavioral experiments have been conducted that help understand the factors influencing this behavior. In this paper, we propose Appropriateness of Reliance (AoR) as an underlying, quantifiable two-dimensional measurement concept. We develop a research model that analyzes the effect of providing explanations for AI advice. In an experiment with 200 participants, we demonstrate how these explanations influence the AoR, and, thus, the effectiveness of AI advice. Our work contributes fundamental concepts for the analysis of reliance behavior and the purposeful design of AI advisors. △ Less

Submitted 13 April, 2023; v1 submitted 4 February, 2023; originally announced February 2023.

Comments: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:2204.06916

Journal ref: ACM 28th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI), 2023

On the Influence of Cognitive Styles on Users' Understanding of Explanations

Authors: Lara Riefle, Patrick Hemmer, Carina Benz, Michael Vössing, Jannik Pries

Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming increasingly complex, making it difficult for users to understand how the AI has derived its prediction. Using explainable AI (XAI)-methods, researchers aim to explain AI decisions to users. So far, XAI-based explanations pursue a technology-focused approach - neglecting the influence of users' cognitive abilities and differences in information processing o… ▽ More Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming increasingly complex, making it difficult for users to understand how the AI has derived its prediction. Using explainable AI (XAI)-methods, researchers aim to explain AI decisions to users. So far, XAI-based explanations pursue a technology-focused approach - neglecting the influence of users' cognitive abilities and differences in information processing on the understanding of explanations. Hence, this study takes a human-centered perspective and incorporates insights from cognitive psychology. In particular, we draw on the psychological construct of cognitive styles that describe humans' characteristic modes of processing information. Applying a between-subject experiment design, we investigate how users' rational and intuitive cognitive styles affect their objective and subjective understanding of different types of explanations provided by an AI. Initial results indicate substantial differences in users' understanding depending on their cognitive style. We expect to contribute to a more nuanced view of the interrelation of human factors and XAI design. △ Less

Submitted 5 October, 2022; originally announced October 2022.

Comments: Accepted at 43rd International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2022)

On the Influence of Explainable AI on Automation Bias

Authors: Max Schemmer, Niklas Kühl, Carina Benz, Gerhard Satzger

Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) is gaining momentum, and its importance for the future of work in many areas, such as medicine and banking, is continuously rising. However, insights on the effective collaboration of humans and AI are still rare. Typically, AI supports humans in decision-making by addressing human limitations. However, it may also evoke human bias, especially in the form of automation… ▽ More Artificial intelligence (AI) is gaining momentum, and its importance for the future of work in many areas, such as medicine and banking, is continuously rising. However, insights on the effective collaboration of humans and AI are still rare. Typically, AI supports humans in decision-making by addressing human limitations. However, it may also evoke human bias, especially in the form of automation bias as an over-reliance on AI advice. We aim to shed light on the potential to influence automation bias by explainable AI (XAI). In this pre-test, we derive a research model and describe our study design. Subsequentially, we conduct an online experiment with regard to hotel review classifications and discuss first results. We expect our research to contribute to the design and development of safe hybrid intelligence systems. △ Less

Submitted 19 April, 2022; originally announced April 2022.

Comments: Thirtieth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2022)

Should I Follow AI-based Advice? Measuring Appropriate Reliance in Human-AI Decision-Making

Authors: Max Schemmer, Patrick Hemmer, Niklas Kühl, Carina Benz, Gerhard Satzger

Abstract: Many important decisions in daily life are made with the help of advisors, e.g., decisions about medical treatments or financial investments. Whereas in the past, advice has often been received from human experts, friends, or family, advisors based on artificial intelligence (AI) have become more and more present nowadays. Typically, the advice generated by AI is judged by a human and either deeme… ▽ More Many important decisions in daily life are made with the help of advisors, e.g., decisions about medical treatments or financial investments. Whereas in the past, advice has often been received from human experts, friends, or family, advisors based on artificial intelligence (AI) have become more and more present nowadays. Typically, the advice generated by AI is judged by a human and either deemed reliable or rejected. However, recent work has shown that AI advice is not always beneficial, as humans have shown to be unable to ignore incorrect AI advice, essentially representing an over-reliance on AI. Therefore, the aspired goal should be to enable humans not to rely on AI advice blindly but rather to distinguish its quality and act upon it to make better decisions. Specifically, that means that humans should rely on the AI in the presence of correct advice and self-rely when confronted with incorrect advice, i.e., establish appropriate reliance (AR) on AI advice on a case-by-case basis. Current research lacks a metric for AR. This prevents a rigorous evaluation of factors impacting AR and hinders further development of human-AI decision-making. Therefore, based on the literature, we derive a measurement concept of AR. We propose to view AR as a two-dimensional construct that measures the ability to discriminate advice quality and behave accordingly. In this article, we derive the measurement concept, illustrate its application and outline potential future research. △ Less

Submitted 14 April, 2022; originally announced April 2022.

Comments: ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '22), Workshop on Trust and Reliance in AI-Human Teams (trAIt)

Counterfactual Inference of Second Opinions

Authors: Nina L. Corvelo Benz, Manuel Gomez Rodriguez

Abstract: Automated decision support systems that are able to infer second opinions from experts can potentially facilitate a more efficient allocation of resources; they can help decide when and from whom to seek a second opinion. In this paper, we look at the design of this type of support systems from the perspective of counterfactual inference. We focus on a multiclass classification setting and first s… ▽ More Automated decision support systems that are able to infer second opinions from experts can potentially facilitate a more efficient allocation of resources; they can help decide when and from whom to seek a second opinion. In this paper, we look at the design of this type of support systems from the perspective of counterfactual inference. We focus on a multiclass classification setting and first show that, if experts make predictions on their own, the underlying causal mechanism generating their predictions needs to satisfy a desirable set invariant property. Further, we show that, for any causal mechanism satisfying this property, there exists an equivalent mechanism where the predictions by each expert are generated by independent sub-mechanisms governed by a common noise. This motivates the design of a set invariant Gumbel-Max structural causal model where the structure of the noise governing the sub-mechanisms underpinning the model depends on an intuitive notion of similarity between experts which can be estimated from data. Experiments on both synthetic and real data show that our model can be used to infer second opinions more accurately than its non-causal counterpart. △ Less

Submitted 30 June, 2022; v1 submitted 16 March, 2022; originally announced March 2022.