Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userExpanding Explainability: Towards Social Transparency in AI systems
81
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Upol Ehsan
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
As AI-powered systems increasingly mediate consequential decision-making, their explainability is critical for end-users to take informed and accountable actions. Explanations in human-human interactions are socially-situated. AI systems are often socio-organizationally embedded. However, Explainable AI (XAI) approaches have been predominantly algorithm-centered. We take a developmental step towards socially-situated XAI by introducing and exploring Social Transparency (ST), a sociotechnically informed perspective that incorporates the socio-organizational context into explaining AI-mediated decision-making. To explore ST conceptually, we conducted interviews with 29 AI users and practitioners grounded in a speculative design scenario. We suggested constitutive design elements of ST and developed a conceptual framework to unpack STs effect and implications at the technical, decision-making, and organizational level. The framework showcases how ST can potentially calibrate trust in AI, improve decision-making, facilitate organizational collective actions, and cultivate holistic explainability. Our work contributes to the discourse of Human-Centered XAI by expanding the design space of XAI.
rate research
Read More
Thinking of technology as a design material is appealing. It encourages designers to explore the materials properties to understand its capabilities and limitations, a prerequisite to generative design thinking. However, as a material, AI resists this approach because its properties emerge as part of the design process itself. Therefore, designers and AI engineers must collaborate in new ways to create both the material and its application experience. We investigate the co-creation process through a design study with 10 pairs of designers and engineers. We find that design probes with user data are a useful tool in defining AI materials. Through data probes, designers construct designerly representations of the envisioned AI experience (AIX) to identify desirable AI characteristics. Data probes facilitate divergent thinking, material testing, and design validation. Based on our findings, we propose a process model for co-creating AIX and offer design considerations for incorporating data probes in design tools.
We argue that a key challenge in enabling usable and useful interactive task learning for intelligent agents is to facilitate effective Human-AI collaboration. We reflect on our past 5 years of efforts on designing, developing and studying the SUGILITE system, discuss the issues on incorporating recent advances in AI with HCI principles in mixed-initiative interactions and multi-modal interactions, and summarize the lessons we learned. Lastly, we identify several challenges and opportunities, and describe our ongoing work
Reinforcement Learning AI commonly uses reward/penalty signals that are objective and explicit in an environment -- e.g. game score, completion time, etc. -- in order to learn the optimal strategy for task performance. However, Human-AI interaction for such AI agents should include additional reinforcement that is implicit and subjective -- e.g. human preferences for certain AI behavior -- in order to adapt the AI behavior to idiosyncratic human preferences. Such adaptations would mirror naturally occurring processes that increase trust and comfort during social interactions. Here, we show how a hybrid brain-computer-interface (hBCI), which detects an individuals level of interest in objects/events in a virtual environment, can be used to adapt the behavior of a Deep Reinforcement Learning AI agent that is controlling a virtual autonomous vehicle. Specifically, we show that the AI learns a driving strategy that maintains a safe distance from a lead vehicle, and most novelly, preferentially slows the vehicle when the human passengers of the vehicle encounter objects of interest. This adaptation affords an additional 20% viewing time for subjectively interesting objects. This is the first demonstration of how an hBCI can be used to provide implicit reinforcement to an AI agent in a way that incorporates user preferences into the control system.
Explainability of AI systems is critical for users to take informed actions and hold systems accountable. While opening the opaque box is important, understanding who opens the box can govern if the Human-AI interaction is effective. In this paper, we conduct a mixed-methods study of how two different groups of whos--people with and without a background in AI--perceive different types of AI explanations. These groups were chosen to look at how disparities in AI backgrounds can exacerbate the creator-consumer gap. We quantitatively share what the perceptions are along five dimensions: confidence, intelligence, understandability, second chance, and friendliness. Qualitatively, we highlight how the AI background influences each groups interpretations and elucidate why the differences might exist through the lenses of appropriation and cognitive heuristics. We find that (1) both groups had unwarranted faith in numbers, to different extents and for different reasons, (2) each group found explanatory values in different explanations that went beyond the usage we designed them for, and (3) each group had different requirements of what counts as humanlike explanations. Using our findings, we discuss potential negative consequences such as harmful manipulation of user trust and propose design interventions to mitigate them. By bringing conscious awareness to how and why AI backgrounds shape perceptions of potential creators and consumers in XAI, our work takes a formative step in advancing a pluralistic Human-centered Explainable AI discourse.
This position paper examines potential pitfalls on the way towards achieving human-AI co-creation with generative models in a way that is beneficial to the users interests. In particular, we collected a set of nine potential pitfalls, based on the literature and our own experiences as researchers working at the intersection of HCI and AI. We illustrate each pitfall with examples and suggest ideas for addressing it. Reflecting on all pitfalls, we discuss and conclude with implications for future research directions. With this collection, we hope to contribute to a critical and constructive discussion on the roles of humans and AI in co-creative interactions, with an eye on related assumptions and potential side-effects for creative practices and beyond.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
