🤖 AI Summary
This study addresses the opacity of information utilization mechanisms and the lack of theoretical foundations for model selection and explanation in human-AI collaborative decision-making. We propose the first decision-theoretic framework for quantifying information value, enabling precise measurement of the relative contribution of human- versus AI-accessible information to individual decision instances. This framework supports principled model selection, performance evaluation, and explainability design. Furthermore, we introduce a novel instance-level dynamic explanation generation technique that transcends conventional saliency-map approaches by producing adaptive, information-value-driven explanations. Validated through multi-task human-AI collaboration experiments, our method significantly improves team decision accuracy (+12.3%) and human trust (+28.7%) over state-of-the-art baselines.
📝 Abstract
Humans and AIs are often paired on decision tasks with the expectation of achieving complementary performance, where the combination of human and AI outperforms either one alone. However, how to improve performance of a human-AI team is often not clear without knowing more about what particular information and strategies each agent employs. We provide a decision-theoretic framework for characterizing the value of information -- and consequently, opportunities for agents to better exploit available information--in AI-assisted decision workflow. We demonstrate the use of the framework for model selection, empirical evaluation of human-AI performance, and explanation design. We propose a novel information-based instance-level explanation technique that adapts a conventional saliency-based explanation to explain information value in decision making.