analiza aiqbench
This paper introduces the first formal framework for evaluating reliance on set-valued AI advice, addressing a critical gap where existing metrics only consider point predictions. By defining specific metrics for classification and regression tasks, it enables more nuanced assessment of human-AI collaboration that accounts for uncertainty communication. This advancement is significant for researchers developing sequential judge-advisor systems who need to quantify how effectively users utilize interval-based or discrete set outputs to improve decision accuracy.
A Framework for Measuring Appropriate Reliance on Set-Valued AI Advice
arXiv:2606.06081v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Appropriate reliance on AI advice has become a central research theme in human-AI collaboration. Existing frameworks have focused exclusively on point predictions as AI advice. However, set-valued AI advice (e.g., discrete sets or continuous intervals) is increasingly being used to communicate uncertainty and improve human decision making. In this paper, we develop the first formal framework for measuring appropriate reliance on set-valued AI advice within the sequential judge-advisor paradigm, spanning both classification and regression tasks. For classification, we first introduce the dimensions that are necessary for evaluating set-valued AI advice. We then define two metrics: correct reliance rate on AI and correct reliance rate on self, which jointly characterize appropriate reliance in this setting. For regression, we introduce quantity of AI reliance and quality of AI reliance, which respectively measure whether a decision maker utilized the AI advice and whether their reliance helped them get closer to the ground truth relative to their initial estimate. Through the application of our framework, we demonstrate how these metrics capture important nuances in human-AI collaboration that existing measures overlook.
Abstract:Appropriate reliance on AI advice has become a central research theme in human-AI collaboration. Existing frameworks have focused exclusively on point predictions as AI advice. However, set-valued AI advice (e.g., discrete sets or continuous intervals) is increasingly being used to communicate uncertainty and improve human decision making. In this paper, we develop the first formal framework for measuring appropriate reliance on set-valued AI advice within the sequential judge-advisor paradigm, spanning both classification and regression tasks. For classification, we first introduce the dimensions that are necessary for evaluating set-valued AI advice. We then define two metrics: correct reliance rate on AI and correct reliance rate on self, which jointly characterize appropriate reliance in this setting. For regression, we introduce quantity of AI reliance and quality of AI reliance, which respectively measure whether a decision maker utilized the AI advice and whether their reliance helped them get closer to the ground truth relative to their initial estimate. Through the application of our framework, we demonstrate how these metrics capture important nuances in human-AI collaboration that existing measures overlook.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC)
arXiv:2606.06081 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2606.06081v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.06081 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 273 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
A Framework for Measuring Appropriate Reliance on Set-Valued AI Advice
arXiv · 21 aug. 2026

Hint-based CoT faithfulness evals still mostly work on Claude
LessWrong · 30 iul. 2026

BRICS Draws a New Global Line: Full Text of New Delhi Declaration
slguardian.org · 12 sept. 2026
The Continual Constitutional Convention: How language models revise the documents that govern them
AI Alignment Forum · 13 oct. 2026