On the Definition of Appropriate Trust and the Tools that Come with it (2309.11937v1)
Abstract: Evaluating the efficiency of human-AI interactions is challenging, including subjective and objective quality aspects. With the focus on the human experience of the explanations, evaluations of explanation methods have become mostly subjective, making comparative evaluations almost impossible and highly linked to the individual user. However, it is commonly agreed that one aspect of explanation quality is how effectively the user can detect if the predictions are trustworthy and correct, i.e., if the explanations can increase the user's appropriate trust in the model. This paper starts with the definitions of appropriate trust from the literature. It compares the definitions with model performance evaluation, showing the strong similarities between appropriate trust and model performance evaluation. The paper's main contribution is a novel approach to evaluating appropriate trust by taking advantage of the likenesses between definitions. The paper offers several straightforward evaluation methods for different aspects of user performance, including suggesting a method for measuring uncertainty and appropriate trust in regression.
- J. Zhou, A. H. Gandomi, F. Chen, and A. Holzinger, “Evaluating the quality of machine learning explanations: A survey on methods and metrics,” Electronics, vol. 10, no. 5, p. 593, 2021.
- M. T. Ribeiro, S. Singh, and C. Guestrin, “Why should i trust you?” explaining the predictions of any classifier,” in Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, pp. 1135–1144, 2016.
- The European Commission Independent High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence, “Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI,” 2019.
- David Gunning, “Explainable Artificial Intelligence.” Web, 2017. DARPA.
- B. Dimanov, U. Bhatt, M. Jamnik, and A. Weller, “You shouldn’t trust me: Learning models which conceal unfairness from multiple explanation methods.,” Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications: ECAI 2020, 2020.
- H. Löfström, K. Hammar, and U. Johansson, “A meta survey of quality evaluation criteria in explanation methods,” in Intelligent Information Systems (J. De Weerdt and A. Polyvyanyy, eds.), (Cham), pp. 55–63, Springer International Publishing, 2022.
- R. R. Hoffman, S. T. Mueller, G. Klein, and J. Litman, “Metrics for explainable ai: Challenges and prospects,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.04608, 2018.
- R. Guidotti, A. Monreale, S. Ruggieri, F. Turini, D. Pedreschi, and F. Giannotti, “A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Models,” ArXiv e-prints, Feb. 2018.
- C. Molnar, Interpretable Machine Learning. Leanpub, 2 ed., 2022.
- M. Moradi and M. Samwald, “Post-hoc explanation of black-box classifiers using confident itemsets,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 165, p. 113941, 2021.
- A. Holzinger, G. Langs, H. Denk, K. Zatloukal, and H. Müller, “Causability and explainability of artificial intelligence in medicine,” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, vol. 9, no. 4, p. e1312, 2019.
- F. Doshi-Velez and B. Kim, “Towards a rigorous science of interpretable machine learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.08608, 2017.
- D. Gunning and D. W. Aha, “Darpa’s explainable artificial intelligence program,” AI Magazine, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 44–58, 2019.
- D. V. Carvalho, E. M. Pereira, and J. S. Cardoso, “Machine learning interpretability: A survey on methods and metrics,” Electronics, vol. 8, p. 832, 2019.
- K. A. Hoff and M. Bashir, “Trust in automation: Integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust,” Human factors, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 407–434, 2015.
- A. Jacovi, A. Marasović, T. Miller, and Y. Goldberg, “Formalizing trust in artificial intelligence: Prerequisites, causes and goals of human trust in ai,” in Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, pp. 624–635, 2021.
- F. Yang, Z. Huang, J. Scholtz, and D. L. Arendt, “How do visual explanations foster end users’ appropriate trust in machine learning?,” in Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, pp. 189–201, 2020.
- Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Santa Monica, CA, 2002.
- M. Adya and G. Phillips-Wren, “Stressed decision makers and use of decision aids: a literature review and conceptual model,” Information Technology & People, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 710–754, 2020.
- J. A. Alvarado-Valencia and L. H. Barrero, “Reliance, trust and heuristics in judgmental forecasting,” Computers in human behavior, vol. 36, pp. 102–113, 2014.
- Z. Buçinca, P. Lin, K. Z. Gajos, and E. L. Glassman, “Proxy tasks and subjective measures can be misleading in evaluating explainable ai systems,” in Proceedings of the 25th international conference on intelligent user interfaces, pp. 454–464, 2020.
- ” O’Reilly Media, Inc.”, 2022.
- Springer, 2005.
- U. Johansson, H. Boström, T. Löfström, and H. Linusson, “Regression conformal prediction with random forests,” Machine learning, vol. 97, pp. 155–176, 2014.
- A. Lambrou, I. Nouretdinov, and H. Papadopoulos, “Inductive venn prediction,” Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 181–201, 2015.
- P. L. McDermott and R. N. t. Brink, “Practical guidance for evaluating calibrated trust,” in Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 63, pp. 362–366, SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA, 2019.
- A. B. Arrieta, N. Díaz-Rodríguez, J. Del Ser, A. Bennetot, S. Tabik, A. Barbado, S. García, S. Gil-López, D. Molina, R. Benjamins, et al., “Explainable artificial intelligence (xai): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible ai,” Information Fusion, vol. 58, pp. 82–115, 2020.
- M. Chromik and M. Schuessler, “A taxonomy for human subject evaluation of black-box explanations in xai.,” in ExSS-ATEC@ IUI, 2020.
- A. Das and P. Rad, “Opportunities and challenges in explainable artificial intelligence (xai): A survey,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.11371, 2020.
- A. Adadi and M. Berrada, “Peeking inside the black-box: A survey on explainable artificial intelligence (xai),” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 52138–52160, 2018.
- D. Wang, Q. Yang, A. Abdul, and B. Y. Lim, “Designing theory-driven user-centric explainable ai,” in Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ’19, (New York, NY, USA), p. 1–15, Association for Computing Machinery, 2019.
- S. Mohseni, N. Zarei, and E. D. Ragan, “A multidisciplinary survey and framework for design and evaluation of explainable ai systems,” arXiv, pp. arXiv–1811, 2018.
- D. Gunning, E. Vorm, Y. Wang, and M. Turek, “Darpa’s explainable ai (xai) program: A retrospective,” Authorea Preprints, 2021.
- Y. Zhang and X. Chen, “Explainable recommendation: A survey and new perspectives,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.11192, 2018.
- S. M. Merritt, D. Lee, J. L. Unnerstall, and K. Huber, “Are well-calibrated users effective users? associations between calibration of trust and performance on an automation-aided task,” Human Factors, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 34–47, 2015.
- J. D. Lee and K. A. See, “Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance,” Human factors, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 50–80, 2004.
- D. Gunning, M. Stefik, J. Choi, T. Miller, S. Stumpf, and G.-Z. Yang, “Xai—explainable artificial intelligence,” Science robotics, vol. 4, no. 37, p. eaay7120, 2019.
- A. Holzinger, A. Carrington, and H. Müller, “Measuring the quality of explanations: the system causability scale (scs),” KI-Künstliche Intelligenz, pp. 1–6, 2020.
- H. Löfström, T. Löfström, and U. Johansson, “Interpretable instance-based text classification for social science research projects,” Archives of Data Science, Series A, vol. 5, no. 1, 2018.
- Helena Löfström (6 papers)