Goto

Collaborating Authors

Towards Social Situation Awareness in Support Agents

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Artificial agents that support people in their daily activities (e.g., virtual coaches and personal assistants) are increasingly prevalent. Since many daily activities are social in nature, support agents should understand a user's social situation to offer comprehensive support. However, there are no systematic approaches for developing support agents that are social situation aware. We identify key requirements for a support agent to be social situation aware and propose steps to realize those requirements. These steps are presented through a conceptual architecture that centers around two key ideas: (1) conceptualizing social situation awareness as an instantiation of `general' situation awareness, and (2) using situation taxonomies as the key element of such instantiation. This enables support agents to represent a user's social situation, comprehend its meaning, and assess its impact on the user's behavior. We discuss empirical results supporting that the proposed approach can be effective and illustrate how the architecture can be used in support agents through a use case.


Interestingness Elements for Explainable Reinforcement Learning: Understanding Agents' Capabilities and Limitations

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

We propose an explainable reinforcement learning (XRL) framework that analyzes an agent's history of interaction with the environment to extract interestingness elements that help explain its behavior. The framework relies on data readily available from standard RL algorithms, augmented with data that can easily be collected by the agent while learning. We describe how to create visual explanations of an agent's behavior in the form of short video-clips highlighting key interaction moments, based on the proposed elements. We also report on a user study where we evaluated the ability of humans in correctly perceiving the aptitude of agents with different characteristics, including their capabilities and limitations, given explanations automatically generated by our framework. The results show that the diversity of aspects captured by the different interestingness elements is crucial to help humans correctly identify the agents' aptitude in the task, and determine when they might need adjustments to improve their performance.


Levels of explainable artificial intelligence for human-aligned conversational explanations

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Over the last few years there has been rapid research growth into eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) and the closely aligned Interpretable Machine Learning (IML). Drivers for this growth include recent legislative changes and increased investments by industry and governments, along with increased concern from the general public. People are affected by autonomous decisions every day and the public need to understand the decision-making process to accept the outcomes. However, the vast majority of the applications of XAI/IML are focused on providing low-level `narrow' explanations of how an individual decision was reached based on a particular datum. While important, these explanations rarely provide insights into an agent's: beliefs and motivations; hypotheses of other (human, animal or AI) agents' intentions; interpretation of external cultural expectations; or, processes used to generate its own explanation. Yet all of these factors, we propose, are essential to providing the explanatory depth that people require to accept and trust the AI's decision-making. This paper aims to define levels of explanation and describe how they can be integrated to create a human-aligned conversational explanation system. In so doing, this paper will survey current approaches and discuss the integration of different technologies to achieve these levels with Broad eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (Broad-XAI), and thereby move towards high-level `strong' explanations.


More Similar Values, More Trust? -- the Effect of Value Similarity on Trust in Human-Agent Interaction

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

As AI systems are increasingly involved in decision making, it also becomes important that they elicit appropriate levels of trust from their users. To achieve this, it is first important to understand which factors influence trust in AI. We identify that a research gap exists regarding the role of personal values in trust in AI. Therefore, this paper studies how human and agent Value Similarity (VS) influences a human's trust in that agent. To explore this, 89 participants teamed up with five different agents, which were designed with varying levels of value similarity to that of the participants. In a within-subjects, scenario-based experiment, agents gave suggestions on what to do when entering the building to save a hostage. We analyzed the agent's scores on subjective value similarity, trust and qualitative data from open-ended questions. Our results show that agents rated as having more similar values also scored higher on trust, indicating a positive effect between the two. With this result, we add to the existing understanding of human-agent trust by providing insight into the role of value-similarity.


Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

There has been a recent resurgence in the area of explainable artificial intelligence as researchers and practitioners seek to make their algorithms more understandable. Much of this research is focused on explicitly explaining decisions or actions to a human observer, and it should not be controversial to say that looking at how humans explain to each other can serve as a useful starting point for explanation in artificial intelligence. However, it is fair to say that most work in explainable artificial intelligence uses only the researchers' intuition of what constitutes a `good' explanation. There exists vast and valuable bodies of research in philosophy, psychology, and cognitive science of how people define, generate, select, evaluate, and present explanations, which argues that people employ certain cognitive biases and social expectations towards the explanation process. This paper argues that the field of explainable artificial intelligence should build on this existing research, and reviews relevant papers from philosophy, cognitive psychology/science, and social psychology, which study these topics. It draws out some important findings, and discusses ways that these can be infused with work on explainable artificial intelligence.