AI and ML models have already found many applications in critical domains, such as healthcare and criminal justice. However, fully automating such high-stakes applications can raise ethical or fairness concerns. Instead, in such cases, humans should be assisted by automated systems so that the two parties reach a joint decision, stemming out of their interaction. In this work we conduct an empirical study to identify how uncertainty estimates and model explanations affect users' reliance, understanding, and trust towards a model, looking for potential benefits of bringing the two together. Moreover, we seek to assess how users' behaviour is affected by their own self-confidence in their abilities to perform a certain task, while we also discuss how the latter may distort the outcome of an analysis based on agreement and switching percentages.
相關內容
In chronic diseases, obtaining a correct diagnosis and providing the most appropriate treatments often is not enough to guarantee an improvement of the clinical condition of a patient. Poor adherence to medical prescriptions constitutes one of the main causes preventing achievement of therapeutic goals. This is generally true especially for certain diseases and specific target patients, such as children. An engaging and entertaining technology can be exploited in support of clinical practices to achieve better health outcomes. Our assumption is that a gamified session with a humanoid robot, compared to the usual methodologies for therapeutic education, can be more incisive in learning the correct inhalation procedure in children affected by asthma. In this perspective, we describe an interactive module implemented on the Pepper robotic platform and the setting of a study that was planned in 2020 to be held at the Pneumoallergology Pediatric clinic of CNR in Palermo. The study was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our long-term goal is to assess, by means of a qualitative-quantitative survey plan, the impact of such an educational action, evaluating possible improvement in the adherence to the treatment.
A bioequivalence study is a type of clinical trial designed to compare the biological equivalence of two different formulations of a drug. Such studies are typically conducted in controlled clinical settings with human subjects, who are randomly assigned to receive two formulations. The two formulations are then compared with respect to their pharmacokinetic profiles, which encompass the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination of the drug. Under the guidance from Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for a size-$\alpha$ bioequivalence test, the standard approach is to construct a $100(1-2\alpha)\%$ confidence interval and verify if the confidence interval falls with the critical region. In this work, we clarify that $100(1-2\alpha)\%$ confidence interval approach for bioequivalence testing yields a size-$\alpha$ test only when the two one-sided tests in TOST are ``equal-tailed''. Furthermore, a $100(1-\alpha)\%$ confidence interval approach is also discussed in the bioequivalence study.
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) such as the emergence of large language models including ChatGPT and DALLE 2 has brought both opportunities for improving productivity and raised ethical concerns. This paper investigates the ethics of using artificial intelligence (AI) in cartography, with a particular focus on the generation of maps using DALLE 2. To accomplish this, we first create an open-sourced dataset that includes synthetic (AI-generated) and real-world (human-designed) maps at multiple scales with a variety settings. We subsequently examine four potential ethical concerns that may arise from the characteristics of DALLE 2 generated maps, namely inaccuracies, misleading information, unanticipated features, and reproducibility. We then develop a deep learning-based ethical examination system that identifies those AI-generated maps. Our research emphasizes the importance of ethical considerations in the development and use of AI techniques in cartography, contributing to the growing body of work on trustworthy maps. We aim to raise public awareness of the potential risks associated with AI-generated maps and support the development of ethical guidelines for their future use.
Explainable recommender systems (RS) have traditionally followed a one-size-fits-all approach, delivering the same explanation level of detail to each user, without considering their individual needs and goals. Further, explanations in RS have so far been presented mostly in a static and non-interactive manner. To fill these research gaps, we aim in this paper to adopt a user-centered, interactive explanation model that provides explanations with different levels of detail and empowers users to interact with, control, and personalize the explanations based on their needs and preferences. We followed a user-centered approach to design interactive explanations with three levels of detail (basic, intermediate, and advanced) and implemented them in the transparent Recommendation and Interest Modeling Application (RIMA). We conducted a qualitative user study (N=14) to investigate the impact of providing interactive explanations with varying level of details on the users' perception of the explainable RS. Our study showed qualitative evidence that fostering interaction and giving users control in deciding which explanation they would like to see can meet the demands of users with different needs, preferences, and goals, and consequently can have positive effects on different crucial aspects in explainable recommendation, including transparency, trust, satisfaction, and user experience.
Causal inference with spatial environmental data is often challenging due to the presence of interference: outcomes for observational units depend on some combination of local and non-local treatment. This is especially relevant when estimating the effect of power plant emissions controls on population health, as pollution exposure is dictated by (i) the location of point-source emissions, as well as (ii) the transport of pollutants across space via dynamic physical-chemical processes. In this work, we estimate the effectiveness of air quality interventions at coal-fired power plants in reducing two adverse health outcomes in Texas in 2016: pediatric asthma ED visits and Medicare all-cause mortality. We develop methods for causal inference with interference when the underlying network structure is not known with certainty and instead must be estimated from ancillary data. We offer a Bayesian, spatial mechanistic model for the interference mapping which we combine with a flexible non-parametric outcome model to marginalize estimates of causal effects over uncertainty in the structure of interference. Our analysis finds some evidence that emissions controls at upwind power plants reduce asthma ED visits and all-cause mortality, however accounting for uncertainty in the interference renders the results largely inconclusive.
Learning features from data is one of the defining characteristics of deep learning, but our theoretical understanding of the role features play in deep learning is still rudimentary. To address this gap, we introduce a new tool, the interaction tensor, for empirically analyzing the interaction between data and model through features. With the interaction tensor, we make several key observations about how features are distributed in data and how models with different random seeds learn different features. Based on these observations, we propose a conceptual framework for feature learning. Under this framework, the expected accuracy for a single hypothesis and agreement for a pair of hypotheses can both be derived in closed-form. We demonstrate that the proposed framework can explain empirically observed phenomena, including the recently discovered Generalization Disagreement Equality (GDE) that allows for estimating the generalization error with only unlabeled data. Further, our theory also provides explicit construction of natural data distributions that break the GDE. Thus, we believe this work provides valuable new insight into our understanding of feature learning.
Trust has emerged as a key factor in people's interactions with AI-infused systems. Yet, little is known about what models of trust have been used and for what systems: robots, virtual characters, smart vehicles, decision aids, or others. Moreover, there is yet no known standard approach to measuring trust in AI. This scoping review maps out the state of affairs on trust in human-AI interaction (HAII) from the perspectives of models, measures, and methods. Findings suggest that trust is an important and multi-faceted topic of study within HAII contexts. However, most work is under-theorized and under-reported, generally not using established trust models and missing details about methods, especially Wizard of Oz. We offer several targets for systematic review work as well as a research agenda for combining the strengths and addressing the weaknesses of the current literature.
AI is undergoing a paradigm shift with the rise of models (e.g., BERT, DALL-E, GPT-3) that are trained on broad data at scale and are adaptable to a wide range of downstream tasks. We call these models foundation models to underscore their critically central yet incomplete character. This report provides a thorough account of the opportunities and risks of foundation models, ranging from their capabilities (e.g., language, vision, robotics, reasoning, human interaction) and technical principles(e.g., model architectures, training procedures, data, systems, security, evaluation, theory) to their applications (e.g., law, healthcare, education) and societal impact (e.g., inequity, misuse, economic and environmental impact, legal and ethical considerations). Though foundation models are based on standard deep learning and transfer learning, their scale results in new emergent capabilities,and their effectiveness across so many tasks incentivizes homogenization. Homogenization provides powerful leverage but demands caution, as the defects of the foundation model are inherited by all the adapted models downstream. Despite the impending widespread deployment of foundation models, we currently lack a clear understanding of how they work, when they fail, and what they are even capable of due to their emergent properties. To tackle these questions, we believe much of the critical research on foundation models will require deep interdisciplinary collaboration commensurate with their fundamentally sociotechnical nature.
Due to their increasing spread, confidence in neural network predictions became more and more important. However, basic neural networks do not deliver certainty estimates or suffer from over or under confidence. Many researchers have been working on understanding and quantifying uncertainty in a neural network's prediction. As a result, different types and sources of uncertainty have been identified and a variety of approaches to measure and quantify uncertainty in neural networks have been proposed. This work gives a comprehensive overview of uncertainty estimation in neural networks, reviews recent advances in the field, highlights current challenges, and identifies potential research opportunities. It is intended to give anyone interested in uncertainty estimation in neural networks a broad overview and introduction, without presupposing prior knowledge in this field. A comprehensive introduction to the most crucial sources of uncertainty is given and their separation into reducible model uncertainty and not reducible data uncertainty is presented. The modeling of these uncertainties based on deterministic neural networks, Bayesian neural networks, ensemble of neural networks, and test-time data augmentation approaches is introduced and different branches of these fields as well as the latest developments are discussed. For a practical application, we discuss different measures of uncertainty, approaches for the calibration of neural networks and give an overview of existing baselines and implementations. Different examples from the wide spectrum of challenges in different fields give an idea of the needs and challenges regarding uncertainties in practical applications. Additionally, the practical limitations of current methods for mission- and safety-critical real world applications are discussed and an outlook on the next steps towards a broader usage of such methods is given.
The notion of uncertainty is of major importance in machine learning and constitutes a key element of machine learning methodology. In line with the statistical tradition, uncertainty has long been perceived as almost synonymous with standard probability and probabilistic predictions. Yet, due to the steadily increasing relevance of machine learning for practical applications and related issues such as safety requirements, new problems and challenges have recently been identified by machine learning scholars, and these problems may call for new methodological developments. In particular, this includes the importance of distinguishing between (at least) two different types of uncertainty, often refereed to as aleatoric and epistemic. In this paper, we provide an introduction to the topic of uncertainty in machine learning as well as an overview of hitherto attempts at handling uncertainty in general and formalizing this distinction in particular.
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191