Related papers: Leveraging Contextual Counterfactuals Toward Belie…
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…
Counterfactual explanations are a widely used approach in Explainable AI, offering actionable insights into decision-making by illustrating how small changes to input data can lead to different outcomes. Despite their importance, evaluating…
Productive human-AI collaboration requires appropriate reliance, yet contemporary AI systems are often miscalibrated, exhibiting systematic overconfidence or underconfidence. We investigate whether humans can learn to mentally recalibrate…
In the field of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), counterfactual examples explain to a user the predictions of a trained decision model by indicating the modifications to be made to the instance so as to change its associated…
Understanding how humans revise their beliefs in light of new information is crucial for developing AI systems which can effectively model, and thus align with, human reasoning. While theoretical belief revision frameworks rely on a set of…
In AI-assisted decision-making, it is crucial but challenging for humans to achieve appropriate reliance on AI. This paper approaches this problem from a human-centered perspective, "human self-confidence calibration". We begin by proposing…
Today, AI is being increasingly used to help human experts make decisions in high-stakes scenarios. In these scenarios, full automation is often undesirable, not only due to the significance of the outcome, but also because human experts…
There is a broad consensus on the importance of deep learning models in tasks involving complex data. Often, an adequate understanding of these models is required when focusing on the transparency of decisions in human-critical…
As humans increasingly rely on multiround conversational AI for high stakes decisions, principled frameworks are needed to ensure such interactions reliably improve decision quality. We adopt a human centric view governed by two principles:…
Trust calibration between humans and Artificial Intelligence (AI) is crucial for optimal decision-making in collaborative settings. Excessive trust can lead users to accept AI-generated outputs without question, overlooking critical flaws,…
Displaying confidence scores in human-AI interaction has been shown to help build trust between humans and AI systems. However, most existing research uses only the confidence score as a form of communication. As confidence scores are just…
As machine learning models evolve, maintaining transparency demands more human-centric explainable AI techniques. Counterfactual explanations, with roots in human reasoning, identify the minimal input changes needed to obtain a given output…
Complementary collaboration between humans and AI is essential for human-AI decision making. One feasible approach to achieving it involves accounting for the calibrated confidence levels of both AI and users. However, this process would…
The growing integration of machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) models into high-stakes domains such as healthcare and scientific research calls for models that are not only accurate but also interpretable. Among the…
In this paper, we show that counterfactual explanations of confidence scores help users better understand and better trust an AI model's prediction in human-subject studies. Showing confidence scores in human-agent interaction systems can…
In AI-assisted decision-making, it is critical for human decision-makers to know when to trust AI and when to trust themselves. However, prior studies calibrated human trust only based on AI confidence indicating AI's correctness likelihood…
Explainability is widely regarded as essential for trustworthy artificial intelligence systems. However, the metrics commonly used to evaluate counterfactual explanations are algorithmic evaluation metrics that are rarely validated against…
Chain-of-Thought (CoT) faithfulness, i.e., whether CoTs genuinely reflect large language models' (LLM) underlying behavior, is typically evaluated under two disjoint paradigms: contextual faithfulness, measured by perturbing the input or…
Methods to quantify uncertainty in predictions from arbitrary models are in demand in high-stakes domains like medicine and finance. Conformal prediction has emerged as a popular method for producing a set of predictions with specified…
While recent years have witnessed the emergence of various explainable methods in machine learning, to what degree the explanations really represent the reasoning process behind the model prediction -- namely, the faithfulness of…