Algorithmic Decision-Making Safeguarded by Human Knowledge
Commercial AI solutions provide analysts and managers with data-driven business intelligence for a wide range of decisions, such as demand forecasting and pricing. However, human analysts may have their own insights and experiences about the decision-making that is at odds with the algorithmic recommendation. In view of such a conflict, we provide a general analytical framework to study the augmentation of algorithmic decisions with human knowledge: the analyst uses the knowledge to set a guardrail by which the algorithmic decision is clipped if the algorithmic output is out of bound, and seems unreasonable. We study the conditions under which the augmentation is beneficial relative to the raw algorithmic decision. We show that when the algorithmic decision is asymptotically optimal with large data, the non-data-driven human guardrail usually provides no benefit. However, we point out three common pitfalls of the algorithmic decision: (1) lack of domain knowledge, such as the market competition, (2) model misspecification, and (3) data contamination. In these cases, even with sufficient data, the augmentation from human knowledge can still improve the performance of the algorithmic decision.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Decision MakingDemand ForecastingSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Improving Human-AI Partnerships in Child Welfare: Understanding Worker Practices, Challenges, and Desires for Algorithmic Decision Support
AI-based decision support tools (ADS) are increasingly used to augment human decision-making in high-stakes, social contexts. As public sector agencies begin to adopt ADS, it is critical that we understand workers' exper…
Decision MakingFairness Perceptions of Algorithmic Decision-Making: A Systematic Review of the Empirical Literature
Algorithmic decision-making (ADM) increasingly shapes people's daily lives. Given that such autonomous systems can cause severe harm to individuals and social groups, fairness concerns have arisen. A human-centric approa…
Decision MakingFairnessSystematic Literature ReviewDimensions of Diversity in Human Perceptions of Algorithmic Fairness
A growing number of oversight boards and regulatory bodies seek to monitor and govern algorithms that make decisions about people's lives. Prior work has explored how people believe algorithmic decisions should be made, …
Decision MakingDiversityFairnessFair and Unbiased Algorithmic Decision Making: Current State and Future Challenges
Machine learning algorithms are now frequently used in sensitive contexts that substantially affect the course of human lives, such as credit lending or criminal justice. This is driven by the idea that `objective' machi…
BIG-bench Machine LearningDecision MakingFairnessThe FairCeptron: A Framework for Measuring Human Perceptions of Algorithmic Fairness
Measures of algorithmic fairness often do not account for human perceptions of fairness that can substantially vary between different sociodemographics and stakeholders. The FairCeptron framework is an approach for study…
Decision MakingFairness