Can You Explain That? Lucid Explanations Help Human-AI Collaborative Image Retrieval

Arijit Ray, Yi Yao, Rakesh Kumar, Ajay Divakaran, Giedrius Burachas
{"title":"Can You Explain That? Lucid Explanations Help Human-AI Collaborative Image Retrieval","authors":"Arijit Ray, Yi Yao, Rakesh Kumar, Ajay Divakaran, Giedrius Burachas","doi":"10.1609/hcomp.v7i1.5275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While there have been many proposals on making AI algorithms explainable, few have attempted to evaluate the impact of AI-generated explanations on human performance in conducting human-AI collaborative tasks. To bridge the gap, we propose a Twenty-Questions style collaborative image retrieval game, Explanation-assisted Guess Which (ExAG), as a method of evaluating the efficacy of explanations (visual evidence or textual justification) in the context of Visual Question Answering (VQA). In our proposed ExAG, a human user needs to guess a secret image picked by the VQA agent by asking natural language questions to it. We show that overall, when AI explains its answers, users succeed more often in guessing the secret image correctly. Notably, a few correct explanations can readily improve human performance when VQA answers are mostly incorrect as compared to no-explanation games. Furthermore, we also show that while explanations rated as “helpful” significantly improve human performance, “incorrect” and “unhelpful” explanations can degrade performance as compared to no-explanation games. Our experiments, therefore, demonstrate that ExAG is an effective means to evaluate the efficacy of AI-generated explanation on a human-AI collaborative task.","PeriodicalId":87339,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the ... AAAI Conference on Human Computation and Crowdsourcing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the ... AAAI Conference on Human Computation and Crowdsourcing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1609/hcomp.v7i1.5275","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

While there have been many proposals on making AI algorithms explainable, few have attempted to evaluate the impact of AI-generated explanations on human performance in conducting human-AI collaborative tasks. To bridge the gap, we propose a Twenty-Questions style collaborative image retrieval game, Explanation-assisted Guess Which (ExAG), as a method of evaluating the efficacy of explanations (visual evidence or textual justification) in the context of Visual Question Answering (VQA). In our proposed ExAG, a human user needs to guess a secret image picked by the VQA agent by asking natural language questions to it. We show that overall, when AI explains its answers, users succeed more often in guessing the secret image correctly. Notably, a few correct explanations can readily improve human performance when VQA answers are mostly incorrect as compared to no-explanation games. Furthermore, we also show that while explanations rated as “helpful” significantly improve human performance, “incorrect” and “unhelpful” explanations can degrade performance as compared to no-explanation games. Our experiments, therefore, demonstrate that ExAG is an effective means to evaluate the efficacy of AI-generated explanation on a human-AI collaborative task.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
你能解释一下吗?清晰的解释有助于人工智能协同图像检索
虽然有很多关于使人工智能算法可解释的建议,但很少有人试图评估人工智能生成的解释对人类在执行人类-人工智能协作任务时的表现的影响。为了弥补这一差距,我们提出了一个20题风格的协作图像检索游戏,解释辅助猜哪个(ExAG),作为在视觉问答(VQA)背景下评估解释(视觉证据或文本证明)功效的方法。在我们提出的ExAG中,人类用户需要通过向VQA代理提出自然语言问题来猜测它选择的秘密图像。我们表明,总的来说,当人工智能解释它的答案时,用户更容易猜对秘密图像。值得注意的是,与没有解释的游戏相比,当VQA的答案大多不正确时,一些正确的解释可以很容易地提高人类的表现。此外,我们还表明,虽然被评为“有用”的解释显著提高了人类的表现,但与没有解释的游戏相比,“不正确”和“无益”的解释会降低人类的表现。因此,我们的实验表明,ExAG是评估人工智能生成的解释在人类-人工智能协作任务上的有效性的有效手段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Collect, Measure, Repeat: Reliability Factors for Responsible AI Data Collection Crowdsourced Clustering via Active Querying: Practical Algorithm with Theoretical Guarantees BackTrace: A Human-AI Collaborative Approach to Discovering Studio Backdrops in Historical Photographs Confidence Contours: Uncertainty-Aware Annotation for Medical Semantic Segmentation Humans Forgo Reward to Instill Fairness into AI
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1