اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدPerfection Not Required? Human-AI Partnerships in Code Translation
134
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Generative models have become adept at producing artifacts such as images, videos, and prose at human-like levels of proficiency. New generative techniques, such as unsupervised neural machine translation (NMT), have recently been applied to the task of generating source code, translating it from one programming language to another. The artifacts produced in this way may contain imperfections, such as compilation or logical errors. We examine the extent to which software engineers would tolerate such imperfections and explore ways to aid the detection and correction of those errors. Using a design scenario approach, we interviewed 11 software engineers to understand their reactions to the use of an NMT model in the context of application modernization, focusing on the task of translating source code from one language to another. Our three-stage scenario sparked discussions about the utility and desirability of working with an imperfect AI system, how acceptance of that systems outputs would be established, and future opportunities for generative AI in application modernization. Our study highlights how UI features such as confidence highlighting and alternate translations help software engineers work with and better understand generative NMT models.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
Human and AI are increasingly interacting and collaborating to accomplish various complex tasks in the context of diverse application domains (e.g., healthcare, transportation, and creative design). Two dynamic, learning entities (AI and human) have
distinct mental model, expertise, and ability; such fundamental difference/mismatch offers opportunities for bringing new perspectives to achieve better results. However, this mismatch can cause unexpected failure and result in serious consequences. While recent research has paid much attention to enhancing interpretability or explainability to allow machine to explain how it makes a decision for supporting humans, this research argues that there is urging the need for both human and AI should develop specific, corresponding ability to interact and collaborate with each other to form a human-AI team to accomplish superior results. This research introduces a conceptual framework called Co-Learning, in which people can learn with/from and grow with AI partners over time. We characterize three key concepts of co-learning: mutual understanding, mutual benefits, and mutual growth for facilitating human-AI collaboration on complex problem solving. We will present proof-of-concepts to investigate whether and how our approach can help human-AI team to understand and benefit each other, and ultimately improve productivity and creativity on creative problem domains. The insights will contribute to the design of Human-AI collaboration.
Good code quality is a prerequisite for efficiently developing maintainable software. In this paper, we present a novel approach to generate exploranative (explanatory and exploratory) data-driven documents that report code quality in an interactive,
exploratory environment. We employ a template-based natural language generation method to create textual explanations about the code quality, dependent on data from software metrics. The interactive document is enriched by different kinds of visualization, including parallel coordinates plots and scatterplots for data exploration and graphics embedded into text. We devise an interaction model that allows users to explore code quality with consistent linking between text and visualizations; through integrated explanatory text, users are taught background knowledge about code quality aspects. Our approach to interactive documents was developed in a design study process that included software engineering and visual analytics experts. Although the solution is specific to the software engineering scenario, we discuss how the concept could generalize to multivariate data and report lessons learned in a broader scope.
Human-machine complementarity is important when neither the algorithm nor the human yield dominant performance across all instances in a given domain. Most research on algorithmic decision-making solely centers on the algorithms performance, while re
cent work that explores human-machine collaboration has framed the decision-making problems as classification tasks. In this paper, we first propose and then develop a solution for a novel human-machine collaboration problem in a bandit feedback setting. Our solution aims to exploit the human-machine complementarity to maximize decision rewards. We then extend our approach to settings with multiple human decision makers. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed methods using both synthetic and real human responses, and find that our methods outperform both the algorithm and the human when they each make decisions on their own. We also show how personalized routing in the presence of multiple human decision-makers can further improve the human-machine team performance.
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) is changing our lives in many ways. One application domain is data science. New techniques in automating the creation of AI, known as AutoAI or AutoML, aim to automate the work practices of data s
cientists. AutoAI systems are capable of autonomously ingesting and pre-processing data, engineering new features, and creating and scoring models based on a target objectives (e.g. accuracy or run-time efficiency). Though not yet widely adopted, we are interested in understanding how AutoAI will impact the practice of data science. We conducted interviews with 20 data scientists who work at a large, multinational technology company and practice data science in various business settings. Our goal is to understand their current work practices and how these practices might change with AutoAI. Reactions were mixed: while informants expressed concerns about the trend of automating their jobs, they also strongly felt it was inevitable. Despite these concerns, they remained optimistic about their future job security due to a view that the future of data science work will be a collaboration between humans and AI systems, in which both automation and human expertise are indispensable.
As AI continues to advance, human-AI teams are inevitable. However, progress in AI is routinely measured in isolation, without a human in the loop. It is crucial to benchmark progress in AI, not just in isolation, but also in terms of how it translat
es to helping humans perform certain tasks, i.e., the performance of human-AI teams. In this work, we design a cooperative game - GuessWhich - to measure human-AI team performance in the specific context of the AI being a visual conversational agent. GuessWhich involves live interaction between the human and the AI. The AI, which we call ALICE, is provided an image which is unseen by the human. Following a brief description of the image, the human questions ALICE about this secret image to identify it from a fixed pool of images. We measure performance of the human-ALICE team by the number of guesses it takes the human to correctly identify the secret image after a fixed number of dialog rounds with ALICE. We compare performance of the human-ALICE teams for t
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
