In order for AI systems to communicate effectively with people, they must understand how we make decisions. However, people's decisions are not always rational, so the implicit internal models of human decision-making in Large Language Models (LLMs) must account for this. Previous empirical evidence seems to suggest that these implicit models are accurate -- LLMs offer believable proxies of human behavior, acting how we expect humans would in everyday interactions. However, by comparing LLM behavior and predictions to a large dataset of human decisions, we find that this is actually not the case: when both simulating and predicting people's choices, a suite of cutting-edge LLMs (GPT-4o & 4-Turbo, Llama-3-8B & 70B, Claude 3 Opus) assume that people are more rational than we really are. Specifically, these models deviate from human behavior and align more closely with a classic model of rational choice -- expected value theory. Interestingly, people also tend to assume that other people are rational when interpreting their behavior. As a consequence, when we compare the inferences that LLMs and people draw from the decisions of others using another psychological dataset, we find that these inferences are highly correlated. Thus, the implicit decision-making models of LLMs appear to be aligned with the human expectation that other people will act rationally, rather than with how people actually act.

As automated decision making and decision assistance systems become common in everyday life, research on the prevention or mitigation of potential harms that arise from decisions made by these systems has proliferated. However, various research communities have independently conceptualized these harms, envisioned potential applications, and proposed interventions. The result is a somewhat fractured landscape of literature focused generally on ensuring decision-making algorithms "do the right thing". In this paper, we compare and discuss work across two major subsets of this literature: algorithmic fairness, which focuses primarily on predictive systems, and ethical decision making, which focuses primarily on sequential decision making and planning. We explore how each of these settings has articulated its normative concerns, the viability of different techniques for these different settings, and how ideas from each setting may have utility for the other.

In AI-assisted decision-making, it is critical for human decision-makers to know when to trust AI and when to trust themselves. However, prior studies calibrated human trust only based on AI confidence indicating AI's correctness likelihood (CL) but ignored humans' CL, hindering optimal team decision-making. To mitigate this gap, we proposed to promote humans' appropriate trust based on the CL of both sides at a task-instance level. We first modeled humans' CL by approximating their decision-making models and computing their potential performance in similar instances. We demonstrated the feasibility and effectiveness of our model via two preliminary studies. Then, we proposed three CL exploitation strategies to calibrate users' trust explicitly/implicitly in the AI-assisted decision-making process. Results from a between-subjects experiment (N=293) showed that our CL exploitation strategies promoted more appropriate human trust in AI, compared with only using AI confidence. We further provided practical implications for more human-compatible AI-assisted decision-making.

Autonomous driving decision-making is a challenging task due to the inherent complexity and uncertainty in traffic. For example, adjacent vehicles may change their lane or overtake at any time to pass a slow vehicle or to help traffic flow. Anticipating the intention of surrounding vehicles, estimating their future states and integrating them into the decision-making process of an automated vehicle can enhance the reliability of autonomous driving in complex driving scenarios. This paper proposes a Prediction-based Deep Reinforcement Learning (PDRL) decision-making model that considers the manoeuvre intentions of surrounding vehicles in the decision-making process for highway driving. The model is trained using real traffic data and tested in various traffic conditions through a simulation platform. The results show that the proposed PDRL model improves the decision-making performance compared to a Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) model by decreasing collision numbers, resulting in safer driving.

The decision-making of TBM operating parameters has an important guiding significance for TBM safe and efficient construction, and it has been one of the research hotpots in the field of TBM tunneling. For this purpose, this paper introduces rock-breaking rules into machine learning method, and a rock-machine mapping dual-driven by physical-rule and data-mining is established with high accuracy. This dual-driven mappings are subsequently used as objective function and constraints to build a decision-making method for TBM operating parameters. By searching the revolution per minute and penetration corresponding to the extremum of the objective function subject to the constraints, the optimal operating parameters can be obtained. This method is verified in the field of the Second Water Source Channel of Hangzhou, China, resulting in the average penetration rate increased by 11.3%, and the total cost decreased by 10.0%, which proves the practicability and effectiveness of the developed decision-making model.

Reliable navigation systems have a wide range of applications in robotics and autonomous driving. Current approaches employ an open-loop process that converts sensor inputs directly into actions. However, these open-loop schemes are challenging to handle complex and dynamic real-world scenarios due to their poor generalization. Imitating human navigation, we add a reasoning process to convert actions back to internal latent states, forming a two-stage closed loop of perception, decision-making, and reasoning. Firstly, VAE-Enhanced Demonstration Learning endows the model with the understanding of basic navigation rules. Then, two dual processes in RL-Enhanced Interaction Learning generate reward feedback for each other and collectively enhance obstacle avoidance capability. The reasoning model can substantially promote generalization and robustness, and facilitate the deployment of the algorithm to real-world robots without elaborate transfers. Experiments show our method is more adaptable to novel scenarios compared with state-of-the-art approaches.

In recent years, a wide range of investment models have been created using artificial intelligence. Automatic trading by artificial intelligence can expand the range of trading methods, such as by conferring the ability to operate 24 hours a day and the ability to trade with high frequency. Automatic trading can also be expected to trade with more information than is available to humans if it can sufficiently consider past data. In this paper, we propose an investment agent based on a deep reinforcement learning model, which is an artificial intelligence model. The model considers the transaction costs involved in actual trading and creates a framework for trading over a long period of time so that it can make a large profit on a single trade. In doing so, it can maximize the profit while keeping transaction costs low. In addition, in consideration of actual operations, we use online learning so that the system can continue to learn by constantly updating the latest online data instead of learning with static data. This makes it possible to trade in non-stationary financial markets by always incorporating current market trend information.

Understanding human driving behaviors quantitatively is critical even in the era when connected and autonomous vehicles and smart infrastructure are becoming ever more prevalent. This is particularly so as that mixed traffic settings, where autonomous vehicles and human driven vehicles co-exist, are expected to persist for quite some time. Towards this end it is necessary that we have a comprehensive modeling framework for decision-making within which human driving preferences can be inferred statistically from observed driving behaviors in realistic and naturalistic traffic settings. Leveraging a recently proposed computational framework for smart vehicles in a smart world using multi-agent based simulation and optimization, we first recapitulate how the forward problem of driving decision-making is modeled as a state space model. We then show how the model can be inverted to estimate driver preferences from naturalistic traffic data using the standard Kalman filter technique. We explicitly illustrate our approach using the vehicle trajectory data from Sugiyama experiment that was originally meant to demonstrate how stop-and-go shockwave can arise spontaneously without bottlenecks. Not only the estimated state filter can fit the observed data well for each individual vehicle, the inferred utility functions can also re-produce quantitatively similar pattern of the observed collective behaviors. One distinct advantage of our approach is the drastically reduced computational burden. This is possible because our forward model treats driving decision process, which is intrinsically dynamic with multi-agent interactions, as a sequence of independent static optimization problems contingent on the state with a finite look ahead anticipation. Consequently we can practically sidestep solving an interacting dynamic inversion problem that would have been much more computationally demanding.

Discretionary lane change (DLC) is a basic but complex maneuver in driving, which aims at reaching a faster speed or better driving conditions, e.g., further line of sight or better ride quality. Although many DLC decision-making models have been studied in traffic engineering and autonomous driving, the impact of human factors, which is an integral part of current and future traffic flow, is largely ignored in the existing literature. In autonomous driving, the ignorance of human factors of surrounding vehicles will lead to poor interaction between the ego vehicle and the surrounding vehicles, thus, a high risk of accidents. The human factors are also a crucial part to simulate a human-like traffic flow in the traffic engineering area. In this paper, we integrate the human factors that are represented by driving styles to design a new DLC decision-making model. Specifically, our proposed model takes not only the contextual traffic information but also the driving styles of surrounding vehicles into consideration and makes lane-change/keep decisions. Moreover, the model can imitate human drivers' decision-making maneuvers to the greatest extent by learning the driving style of the ego vehicle. Our evaluation results show that the proposed model almost follows the human decision-making maneuvers, which can achieve 98.66% prediction accuracy with respect to human drivers' decisions against the ground truth. Besides, the lane-change impact analysis results demonstrate that our model even performs better than human drivers in terms of improving the safety and speed of traffic.

In a new study, researchers at MIT's Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Lab propose a framework called CommPlan, which gives robots that work alongside humans principles for "good etiquette" and leave it to the robots to make decisions that let them finish tasks efficiently. They claim it's a superior approach to handcrafted rules, because it enables the robots to perform cost-benefit analyses on their decisions rather than follow task- and context-specific policies. CommPlan weighs a combination of factors, including whether a person is busy or likely to respond given past behavior, leveraging a dedicated module -- the Agent Markov Model -- to represent that person's sequential decision-making behaviors. It consists of a model specification process and an execution-time partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP) planner, derived as the robot's decision-making model, which CommPlan uses in tandem to arrive at the robot's actions and communications policies. Using CommPlan, developers first specify five modules -- a task model, communication capability, a communication cost model, a human response model, and a human action-selectable model -- with data, domain expertise, and learning algorithms.