Mixed-initiative systems allow users to interactively provide feedback to potentially improve system performance. Human feedback can correct model errors and update model parameters to dynamically adapt to changing data. Additionally, many users desire the ability to have a greater level of control and fix perceived flaws in systems they rely on. However, how the ability to provide feedback to autonomous systems influences user trust is a largely unexplored area of research. Our research investigates how the act of providing feedback can affect user understanding of an intelligent system and its accuracy. We present a controlled experiment using a simulated object detection system with image data to study the effects of interactive feedback collection on user impressions. The results show that providing human-in-the-loop feedback lowered both participants’ trust in the system and their perception of system accuracy, regardless of whether the system accuracy improved in response to their feedback. These results highlight the importance of considering the effects of allowing end-user feedback on user trust when designing intelligent systems.

EXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) approaches are used to bring transparency to machine learning and artificial intelligence models, and hence, improve the decision-making process for their end-users. While these methods aim to improve human understanding and their mental models, cognitive biases can still influence a user's mental model and decision-making in ways that system designers do not anticipate. This paper presents research on cognitive biases due to ordering effects in intelligent systems. We conducted a controlled user study to understand how the order of observing system weaknesses and strengths can affect the user's mental model, task performance, and reliance on the intelligent system, and we investigate the role of explanations in addressing this bias. Using an explainable video activity recognition tool in the cooking domain, we asked participants to verify whether a set of kitchen policies are being followed, with each policy focusing on a weakness or a strength. We controlled the order of the policies and the presence of explanations to test our hypotheses. Our main finding shows that those who observed system strengths early-on were more prone to automation bias and made significantly more errors due to positive first impressions of the system, while they built a more accurate mental model of the system competencies. On the other hand, those who encountered weaknesses earlier made significantly fewer errors since they tended to rely more on themselves, while they also underestimated model competencies due to having a more negative first impression of the model. Our work presents strong findings that aim to make intelligent system designers aware of such biases when designing such tools.

No abstract

We consider the following activity recognition task: given a video, infer the set of activities being performed in the video and assign each frame to an activity. This task can be solved using modern deep learning architectures based on neural networks or conventional classifiers such as linear models and decision trees. While neural networks exhibit superior predictive performance as compared with decision trees and linear models, they are also uninterpretable and less explainable. We address this accuracy‐explanability gap using a novel framework that feeds the output of a deep neural network to an interpretable, tractable probabilistic model called dynamic cutset networks, and performs joint reasoning over the two to answer questions. The neural network helps achieve high accuracy while dynamic cutset networks because of their polytime probabilistic reasoning capabilities make the system more explainable. We demonstrate the efficacy of our approach by using it to build three prototype systems that solve human‐machine tasks having varying levels of difficulty using cooking videos as an accessible domain. We describe high‐level technical details and key lessons learned in our human subjects evaluations of these systems.

While EXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) approaches aim to improve human-AI collaborative decision-making by improving model transparency and mental model formations, experiential factors associated with human users can cause challenges in ways system designers do not anticipate. In this paper, we first showcase a user study on how anchoring bias can potentially affect mental model formations when users initially interact with an intelligent system and the role of explanations in addressing this bias. Using a video activity recognition tool in cooking domain, we asked participants to verify whether a set of kitchen policies are being followed, with each policy focusing on a weakness or a strength. We controlled the order of the policies and the presence of explanations to test our hypotheses. Our main finding shows that those who observed system strengths early-on were more prone to automation bias and made significantly more errors due to positive first impressions of the system, while they built a more accurate mental model of the system competencies. On the other hand, those who encountered weaknesses earlier made significantly fewer errors since they tended to rely more on themselves, while they also underestimated model competencies due to having a more negative first impression of the model. Motivated by these findings and similar existing work, we formalize and present a conceptual model of user’s past experiences that examine the relations between user’s backgrounds, experiences, and human factors in XAI systems based on usage time. Our work presents strong findings and implications, aiming to raise the awareness of AI designers towards biases associated with user impressions and backgrounds.