Learning to Decide with AI Assistance under Human-Alignment
Nina Corvelo Benz, Eleni Straitouri, and Manuel Gomez-Rodriguez

TL;DR
This paper investigates how alignment between AI confidence and human confidence affects the complexity of learning to make optimal decisions with AI assistance, providing theoretical bounds and empirical validation.
Contribution
It establishes a formal link between confidence alignment and decision-making complexity, deriving regret bounds and demonstrating robustness through human-subject experiments.
Findings
Alignment reduces the regret bounds in decision-making tasks.
Perfect alignment enables significantly lower regret bounds.
Experimental results support the theoretical insights even with imperfect alignment.
Abstract
It is widely agreed that when AI models assist decision-makers in high-stakes domains by predicting an outcome of interest, they should communicate the confidence of their predictions. However, empirical evidence suggests that decision-makers often struggle to determine when to trust a prediction based solely on this communicated confidence. In this context, recent theoretical and empirical work suggests a positive correlation between the utility of AI-assisted decision-making and the degree of alignment between the AI confidence and the decision-makers' confidence in their own predictions. Crucially, these findings do not yet elucidate the extent to which this alignment influences the complexity of learning to make optimal decisions through repeated interactions. In this paper, we address this question in the canonical case of binary predictions and binary decisions. We first show that…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
