论文标题
可解释的积极学习(XAL):一项关于本地解释如何影响注释者体验的实证研究
Explainable Active Learning (XAL): An Empirical Study of How Local Explanations Impact Annotator Experience
论文作者
论文摘要
机器学习技术的广泛采用为可以培训ML模型的人的需求迅速增长。一些人主张“机器老师”一词,以指向ML模型注入域知识的人们的角色。一个有前途的学习范式是主动学习(AL),该模型可以智能地选择实例来查询机器老师的标签。但是,在当前的设置中,人类界面保持最低和不透明。我们开始将AI解释视为教学机器人类界面的核心元素。当人类学生学习时,这是一种常见的模式,可以提出自己的推理并征求老师的反馈。当ML模型学习并仍然犯错时,人类老师应该能够理解错误的推理。当模型成熟时,机器老师应该能够认识到其进度,以便信任并对他们的教学成果充满信心。对于这个愿景,我们提出了一种可解释的主动学习(XAL)的新型范式,通过将最近可解释的AI(XAI)的技术领域引入AL环境中。我们进行了一项经验研究,将模型学习成果,反馈内容和XAL的经验与传统的AL和共同学习(在没有解释的情况下提供模型的预测)进行了比较。我们的研究表明,AI解释的好处是机器教学的接口 - 支持信任校准,并实现丰富的教学反馈形式,以及潜在的缺点 - 通过模型判断和认知工作量进行了促进效应。我们的研究还揭示了重要的个体因素,这些因素介导了机器教师的接收到AI的解释,包括任务知识,AI经验和认知需求。通过反思结果,我们建议对XAL的未来方向和设计含义。
The wide adoption of Machine Learning technologies has created a rapidly growing demand for people who can train ML models. Some advocated the term "machine teacher" to refer to the role of people who inject domain knowledge into ML models. One promising learning paradigm is Active Learning (AL), by which the model intelligently selects instances to query the machine teacher for labels. However, in current AL settings, the human-AI interface remains minimal and opaque. We begin considering AI explanations as a core element of the human-AI interface for teaching machines. When a human student learns, it is a common pattern to present one's own reasoning and solicit feedback from the teacher. When a ML model learns and still makes mistakes, the human teacher should be able to understand the reasoning underlying the mistakes. When the model matures, the machine teacher should be able to recognize its progress in order to trust and feel confident about their teaching outcome. Toward this vision, we propose a novel paradigm of explainable active learning (XAL), by introducing techniques from the recently surging field of explainable AI (XAI) into an AL setting. We conducted an empirical study comparing the model learning outcomes, feedback content and experience with XAL, to that of traditional AL and coactive learning (providing the model's prediction without the explanation). Our study shows benefits of AI explanation as interfaces for machine teaching--supporting trust calibration and enabling rich forms of teaching feedback, and potential drawbacks--anchoring effect with the model judgment and cognitive workload. Our study also reveals important individual factors that mediate a machine teacher's reception to AI explanations, including task knowledge, AI experience and need for cognition. By reflecting on the results, we suggest future directions and design implications for XAL.