-
Explainable and Human-Grounded AI for Decision Support Systems: The Theory of Epistemic Quasi-Partnerships
Authors:
John Dorsch,
Maximilian Moll
Abstract:
In the context of AI decision support systems (AI-DSS), we argue that meeting the demands of ethical and explainable AI (XAI) is about developing AI-DSS to provide human decision-makers with three types of human-grounded explanations: reasons, counterfactuals, and confidence, an approach we refer to as the RCC approach. We begin by reviewing current empirical XAI literature that investigates the r…
▽ More
In the context of AI decision support systems (AI-DSS), we argue that meeting the demands of ethical and explainable AI (XAI) is about developing AI-DSS to provide human decision-makers with three types of human-grounded explanations: reasons, counterfactuals, and confidence, an approach we refer to as the RCC approach. We begin by reviewing current empirical XAI literature that investigates the relationship between various methods for generating model explanations (e.g., LIME, SHAP, Anchors), the perceived trustworthiness of the model, and end-user accuracy. We demonstrate how current theories about what constitutes good human-grounded reasons either do not adequately explain this evidence or do not offer sound ethical advice for development. Thus, we offer a novel theory of human-machine interaction: the theory of epistemic quasi-partnerships (EQP). Finally, we motivate adopting EQP and demonstrate how it explains the empirical evidence, offers sound ethical advice, and entails adopting the RCC approach.
△ Less
Submitted 23 September, 2024;
originally announced September 2024.
-
The impact of labeling automotive AI as "trustworthy" or "reliable" on user evaluation and technology acceptance
Authors:
John Dorsch,
Ophelia Deroy
Abstract:
This study explores whether labeling AI as "trustworthy" or "reliable" influences user perceptions and acceptance of automotive AI technologies. Using a one-way between-subjects design, the research involved 478 online participants who were presented with guidelines for either trustworthy or reliable AI. Participants then evaluated three vignette scenarios and completed a modified version of the T…
▽ More
This study explores whether labeling AI as "trustworthy" or "reliable" influences user perceptions and acceptance of automotive AI technologies. Using a one-way between-subjects design, the research involved 478 online participants who were presented with guidelines for either trustworthy or reliable AI. Participants then evaluated three vignette scenarios and completed a modified version of the Technology Acceptance Model, which included variables such as perceived ease of use, human-like trust, and overall attitude. Although labeling AI as "trustworthy" did not significantly influence judgments on specific scenarios, it increased perceived ease of use and human-like trust, particularly benevolence. This suggests a positive impact on usability and an anthropomorphic effect on user perceptions. The study provides insights into how specific labels can influence attitudes toward AI technology.
△ Less
Submitted 20 August, 2024;
originally announced August 2024.
-
Semi-Supervised Cleansing of Web Argument Corpora
Authors:
Jonas Dorsch,
Henning Wachsmuth
Abstract:
Debate portals and similar web platforms constitute one of the main text sources in computational argumentation research and its applications. While the corpora built upon these sources are rich of argumentatively relevant content and structure, they also include text that is irrelevant, or even detrimental, to their purpose. In this paper, we present a precision-oriented approach to detecting suc…
▽ More
Debate portals and similar web platforms constitute one of the main text sources in computational argumentation research and its applications. While the corpora built upon these sources are rich of argumentatively relevant content and structure, they also include text that is irrelevant, or even detrimental, to their purpose. In this paper, we present a precision-oriented approach to detecting such irrelevant text in a semi-supervised way. Given a few seed examples, the approach automatically learns basic lexical patterns of relevance and irrelevance and then incrementally bootstraps new patterns from sentences matching the patterns. In the existing args.me corpus with 400k argumentative texts, our approach detects almost 87k irrelevant sentences, at a precision of 0.97 according to manual evaluation. With low effort, the approach can be adapted to other web argument corpora, providing a generic way to improve corpus quality.
△ Less
Submitted 3 November, 2020;
originally announced November 2020.
