Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This paper challenges the prevailing "trust calibration" paradigm in AI-assisted decision-making, arguing it is ill-suited for complex, ill-defined real-world scenarios. The authors propose a broader framework where human-AI alignment involves negotiating uncertainty through higher-order decision processes rather than simply matching perceived and actual system reliability. This work offers critical theoretical insights for designing robust coupled systems that function effectively beyond narrow, well-scoped tasks.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Trust Hinders Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2610.15136v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Trust calibration remains the dominant framing of AI-assisted decision making: the goal is to close the gap between perceived and actual trustworthiness of AI systems so that users exhibit appropriate reliance on them. We argue that this approach, while useful for decision problems that are well-defined and clearly scoped, overly restricts what it means to make a decision with AI support. To overcome this limitation, we develop three dimensions of AI-assisted decision making. First, trusting AI is only one of several possible strategies for managing uncertainty. Second, trust calibration is often misapplied when AI models "large-world" decision problems, i.e., ill-defined situations where goals and states are only partially known or unknowable. Third, in such settings human-AI alignment requires addressing higher-order decision processes. We conclude by reflecting on the implications of our observations on the design of process-oriented human-AI coupled systems that jointly identify and negotiate uncertainty throughout the decision-making task.

Abstract:Trust calibration remains the dominant framing of AI-assisted decision making: the goal is to close the gap between perceived and actual trustworthiness of AI systems so that users exhibit appropriate reliance on them. We argue that this approach, while useful for decision problems that are well-defined and clearly scoped, overly restricts what it means to make a decision with AI support. To overcome this limitation, we develop three dimensions of AI-assisted decision making. First, trusting AI is only one of several possible strategies for managing uncertainty. Second, trust calibration is often misapplied when AI models "large-world" decision problems, i.e., ill-defined situations where goals and states are only partially known or unknowable. Third, in such settings human-AI alignment requires addressing higher-order decision processes. We conclude by reflecting on the implications of our observations on the design of process-oriented human-AI coupled systems that jointly identify and negotiate uncertainty throughout the decision-making task.

40th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2026). Workshop: Dynamic Alignment in Human-AI Coupled System (BiAlign Workshop)

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC)

arXiv:2610.15136 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2610.15136v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.15136 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 265 words

Related coverage