arXiv subjects

Nikita Haduong

Publications and source records attributed to Nikita Haduong.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2025

How Performance Pressure Influences AI-Assisted Decision Making

Many domains now employ AI-based decision-making aids, and although the potential for AI systems to assist with decision making is much discussed, human-AI collaboration often underperforms due to factors such as (mis)trust in the AI system and beliefs about AI being incapable of completing subjective tasks. One potential tool for influencing human decision making is performance pressure, which hasn't been much studied in interaction with human-AI decision making. In this work, we examine how pressure and explainable AI (XAI) techniques interact with AI advice-taking behavior. Using an inherently low-stakes task (spam review classification), we demonstrate effective and simple methods to apply pressure and influence human AI advice-taking behavior by manipulating financial incentives and imposing time limits. Our results show complex interaction effects, with different combinations of pressure and XAI techniques either improving or worsening AI advice taking behavior. We conclude by discussing the implications of these interactions, strategies to effectively use pressure, and encourage future research to incorporate pressure analysis.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Efficient Encoder-Decoder Transformer Decoding for Decomposable Tasks

Transformer-based NLP models are powerful but have high computational costs that limit deployment. Finetuned encoder-decoder models are popular in specialized domains and can outperform larger more generalized decoder-only models, such as GPT-4. We introduce a new configuration for encoder-decoder models that improves efficiency on structured output and decomposable tasks where multiple outputs are required for a single shared input. Our method, prompt-in-decoder (PiD), encodes the input once and decodes the output in parallel, boosting both training and inference efficiency by avoiding duplicate input encoding and increasing the operational intensity (ratio of numbers of arithmetic operation to memory access) of decoding process by sharing the input key-value cache. We achieve computation reduction that roughly scales with the number of subtasks, gaining up to 4.6x speed-up over state-of-the-art models for dialogue state tracking, summarization, and question-answering tasks, with comparable or better performance.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

CPS-TaskForge: Generating Collaborative Problem Solving Environments for Diverse Communication Tasks

Teams can outperform individuals; could adding AI teammates further bolster performance of teams solving problems collaboratively? Collaborative problem solving (CPS) research commonly studies teams with two agents (human-human or human-AI), but team research literature finds that, for complex tasks, larger teams are more effective. Progress in studying collaboration with more than two agents, through textual records of team interactions, is hindered by a major data challenge: available CPS corpora are predominantly dyadic, and adapting pre-existing CPS tasks to more agents is non-trivial. We address this data challenge by developing a CPS task generator, CPS-TaskForge, that can produce environments for studying CPS under a wide array of conditions, and releasing a CPS task design checklist grounded in the theoretical PISA 2015 CPS framework to help facilitate the development of CPS corpora with more agents. CPS-TaskForge takes the form of a resource management (tower defense) game, and different CPS tasks can be studied by manipulating game design parameters. We conduct a case study with groups of 3-4 humans to validate production of diverse natural language CPS communication in a game instance produced by CPS-TaskForge. We discuss opportunities for advancing research in CPS (both with human-only and human-AI teams) using different task configurations. We will release data and code.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Risks and NLP Design: A Case Study on Procedural Document QA

As NLP systems are increasingly deployed at scale, concerns about their potential negative impacts have attracted the attention of the research community, yet discussions of risk have mostly been at an abstract level and focused on generic AI or NLP applications. We argue that clearer assessments of risks and harms to users--and concrete strategies to mitigate them--will be possible when we specialize the analysis to more concrete applications and their plausible users. As an illustration, this paper is grounded in cooking recipe procedural document question answering (ProcDocQA), where there are well-defined risks to users such as injuries or allergic reactions. Our case study shows that an existing language model, applied in "zero-shot" mode, quantitatively answers real-world questions about recipes as well or better than the humans who have answered the questions on the web. Using a novel questionnaire informed by theoretical work on AI risk, we conduct a risk-oriented error analysis that could then inform the design of a future system to be deployed with lower risk of harm and better performance.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Does Collaborative Human-LM Dialogue Generation Help Information Extraction from Human Dialogues?

The capabilities of pretrained language models have opened opportunities to explore new application areas, but applications involving human-human interaction are limited by the fact that most data is protected from public release for privacy reasons. Problem-solving human dialogues in real applications can be much more complex than existing Wizard-of-Oz collections, preventing successful domain transfer. To support information extraction (IE) for a private call center dataset, we introduce a human-in-the-loop dialogue generation framework capable of synthesizing realistic dialogues. In IE experiments with auto insurance call center dialogues, we observe 25\% relative improvement in $F_1$ after augmenting a small set of real human conversations with synthetic data. We release code and our synthetic dataset to illustrate the complexity of real-world call center conversations and encourage development of complex dialogue datasets that are more representative of natural data.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2021

All That's 'Human' Is Not Gold: Evaluating Human Evaluation of Generated Text

Human evaluations are typically considered the gold standard in natural language generation, but as models' fluency improves, how well can evaluators detect and judge machine-generated text? We run a study assessing non-experts' ability to distinguish between human- and machine-authored text (GPT2 and GPT3) in three domains (stories, news articles, and recipes). We find that, without training, evaluators distinguished between GPT3- and human-authored text at random chance level. We explore three approaches for quickly training evaluators to better identify GPT3-authored text (detailed instructions, annotated examples, and paired examples) and find that while evaluators' accuracy improved up to 55%, it did not significantly improve across the three domains. Given the inconsistent results across text domains and the often contradictory reasons evaluators gave for their judgments, we examine the role untrained human evaluations play in NLG evaluation and provide recommendations to NLG researchers for improving human evaluations of text generated from state-of-the-art models.

cs.CL↗