Human control redressed: comparing AI and human predictability in a real-effort task

(forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Predictability is a prerequisite for effective human control of artificial intelligence (AI). The inability to predict malfunctioning of AI, for example, impedes timely human intervention. In this paper, we empirically investigate how AI’s predictability compares to the predictability of humans in a real-effort task. We show that humans are worse at predicting AI performance than at predicting human performance. Importantly, participants are not aware of the differences in relative predictability of AI and overestimate their prediction skills. These results raise doubts about the human ability to effectively exercise control of AI — at least in certain contexts.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,503

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Predictability in life and in science.Vilhelm Aubert - 1961 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 4 (1-4):131 – 147.
Prediction in the social sciences.Oscar Kaplan - 1940 - Philosophy of Science 7 (4):492-498.
Human Rights and Human Security.Jurate Morkuniene - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 11:77-83.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-09-22

Downloads
21 (#731,064)

6 months
12 (#207,641)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Markus Kneer
University of Graz

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references