The AI Learns to Lie to Please You: Preventing Biased Feedback Loops in Machine-Assisted Intelligence Analysis

J. Stray
{"title":"The AI Learns to Lie to Please You: Preventing Biased Feedback Loops in Machine-Assisted Intelligence Analysis","authors":"J. Stray","doi":"10.3390/analytics2020020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Researchers are starting to design AI-powered systems to automatically select and summarize the reports most relevant to each analyst, which raises the issue of bias in the information presented. This article focuses on the selection of relevant reports without an explicit query, a task known as recommendation. Drawing on previous work documenting the existence of human-machine feedback loops in recommender systems, this article reviews potential biases and mitigations in the context of intelligence analysis. Such loops can arise when behavioral “engagement” signals such as clicks or user ratings are used to infer the value of displayed information. Even worse, there can be feedback loops in the collection of intelligence information because users may also be responsible for tasking collection. Avoiding misalignment feedback loops requires an alternate, ongoing, non-engagement signal of information quality. Existing evaluation scales for intelligence product quality and rigor, such as the IC Rating Scale, could provide ground-truth feedback. This sparse data can be used in two ways: for human supervision of average performance and to build models that predict human survey ratings for use at recommendation time. Both techniques are widely used today by social media platforms. Open problems include the design of an ideal human evaluation method, the cost of skilled human labor, and the sparsity of the resulting data.","PeriodicalId":93078,"journal":{"name":"Big data analytics","volume":"66 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Big data analytics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/analytics2020020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Researchers are starting to design AI-powered systems to automatically select and summarize the reports most relevant to each analyst, which raises the issue of bias in the information presented. This article focuses on the selection of relevant reports without an explicit query, a task known as recommendation. Drawing on previous work documenting the existence of human-machine feedback loops in recommender systems, this article reviews potential biases and mitigations in the context of intelligence analysis. Such loops can arise when behavioral “engagement” signals such as clicks or user ratings are used to infer the value of displayed information. Even worse, there can be feedback loops in the collection of intelligence information because users may also be responsible for tasking collection. Avoiding misalignment feedback loops requires an alternate, ongoing, non-engagement signal of information quality. Existing evaluation scales for intelligence product quality and rigor, such as the IC Rating Scale, could provide ground-truth feedback. This sparse data can be used in two ways: for human supervision of average performance and to build models that predict human survey ratings for use at recommendation time. Both techniques are widely used today by social media platforms. Open problems include the design of an ideal human evaluation method, the cost of skilled human labor, and the sparsity of the resulting data.
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
人工智能学会撒谎以取悦你:防止机器辅助智能分析中的偏见反馈循环
研究人员开始设计人工智能驱动的系统,以自动选择和总结与每位分析师最相关的报告,这引发了所提供信息存在偏见的问题。本文的重点是在没有显式查询的情况下选择相关报告,这一任务称为推荐。借鉴之前关于推荐系统中存在人机反馈回路的研究,本文回顾了智能分析背景下的潜在偏差和缓解措施。当使用点击或用户评级等行为“粘性”信号来推断所显示信息的价值时,就会出现这种循环。更糟糕的是,在收集情报信息的过程中可能会出现反馈循环,因为用户可能还要负责收集任务。避免不一致的反馈回路需要一个交替的、持续的、非交战的信息质量信号。现有的情报产品质量和严谨性评估量表,如IC评定量表,可以提供ground-truth反馈。这种稀疏数据可以用于两种方式:用于人类对平均性能的监督,以及构建预测人类调查评分的模型,以便在推荐时使用。这两种技术如今都被社交媒体平台广泛使用。开放的问题包括理想的人类评估方法的设计,熟练的人类劳动的成本,以及结果数据的稀疏性。
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
审稿时长
5 weeks
期刊最新文献
A Comparative Analysis of VirLock and Bacteriophage ϕ6 through the Lens of Game Theory Can Oral Grades Predict Final Examination Scores? Case Study in a Higher Education Military Academy Relating the Ramsay Quotient Model to the Classical D-Scoring Rule An Exploration of Clustering Algorithms for Customer Segmentation in the UK Retail Market A Novel Curve Clustering Method for Functional Data: Applications to COVID-19 and Financial Data
×
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