Human-AI Collaboration for Estimating Scientific Replicability
Determining whether published scientific findings can successfully be replicated is a long-standing challenge in the empirical sciences. Existing approaches for replicability assessment typically rely either on human judgment, i.e., creative assembly of human experts, or on machine learning models trained on paper content metadata. While both approaches have demonstrated value, each also has important limitations. Human forecasts can be influenced by cognitive biases and narrow exposure to the research literature, while automated assessments often struggle to capture contextual cues and subtle signals of credibility. In this paper, we examine a hybrid approach. Specifically, we introduce a hybrid prediction market in which algorithmic agents trade alongside human participants to jointly estimate the likelihood that a published scientific finding will be corroborated via the outcome of a controlled replication study. Agents are trained on outcomes from hundreds of prior replication studies while human participants contribute domain knowledge through real-time trading. We evaluate this hybrid approach through multiple live experiments involving participants from different academic disciplines and compare its performance to artificial-only and human-only baselines. Our results show that, except for a few cases, hybrid markets match or outperform artificial prediction markets, producing more accurate and reliable replication forecasts.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
A prototype hybrid prediction market for estimating replicability of published work
We present a prototype hybrid prediction market and demonstrate the avenue it represents for meaningful human-AI collaboration. We build on prior work proposing artificial prediction markets as a novel machine-learning a…
PredictionFrom Model Performance to Claim: How a Change of Focus in Machine Learning Replicability Can Help Bridge the Responsibility Gap
Two goals - improving replicability and accountability of Machine Learning research respectively, have accrued much attention from the AI ethics and the Machine Learning community. Despite sharing the measures of improvi…
EthicsStore Scientific Workflows Data in SSHOC Repository
Today scientific workflows are used by scientists as a way to define automated, scalable, and portable in-silico experiments. Having a formal description of an experiment can improve replicability and reproducibility of …
ManagementA Study on Reproducibility and Replicability of Table Structure Recognition Methods
Concerns about reproducibility in artificial intelligence (AI) have emerged, as researchers have reported unsuccessful attempts to directly reproduce published findings in the field. Replicability, the ability to affirm …
Overconfident and Unconfident AI Hinder Human-AI Collaboration
AI transparency is a central pillar of responsible AI deployment and effective human-AI collaboration. A critical approach is communicating uncertainty, such as displaying AI's confidence level, or its correctness likeli…