With artificial intelligence (AI) systems entering our working and leisure environments with increasing adaptation and learning capabilities, new opportunities arise for developing hybrid (human-AI) intelligence (HI) systems, comprising new ways of collaboration. However, there is not yet a structured way of specifying design solutions of collaboration for hybrid intelligence (HI) systems and there is a lack of best practices shared across application domains. We address this gap by investigating the generalization of specific design solutions into design patterns that can be shared and applied in different contexts. We present a human-centered bottom-up approach for the specification of design solutions and their abstraction into team design patterns. We apply the proposed approach for 4 concrete HI use cases and show the successful extraction of team design patterns that are generalizable, providing re-usable design components across various domains. This work advances previous research on team design patterns and designing applications of HI systems.
MULTIFILE
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) aims to provide insights into the inner workings and the outputs of AI systems. Recently, there’s been growing recognition that explainability is inherently human-centric, tied to how people perceive explanations. Despite this, there is no consensus in the research community on whether user evaluation is crucial in XAI, and if so, what exactly needs to be evaluated and how. This systematic literature review addresses this gap by providing a detailed overview of the current state of affairs in human-centered XAI evaluation. We reviewed 73 papers across various domains where XAI was evaluated with users. These studies assessed what makes an explanation “good” from a user’s perspective, i.e., what makes an explanation meaningful to a user of an AI system. We identified 30 components of meaningful explanations that were evaluated in the reviewed papers and categorized them into a taxonomy of human-centered XAI evaluation, based on: (a) the contextualized quality of the explanation, (b) the contribution of the explanation to human-AI interaction, and (c) the contribution of the explanation to human- AI performance. Our analysis also revealed a lack of standardization in the methodologies applied in XAI user studies, with only 19 of the 73 papers applying an evaluation framework used by at least one other study in the sample. These inconsistencies hinder cross-study comparisons and broader insights. Our findings contribute to understanding what makes explanations meaningful to users and how to measure this, guiding the XAI community toward a more unified approach in human-centered explainability.
MULTIFILE
The potential for Artificial Intelligence is widely proclaimed. Yet, in everyday educational settings the use of this technology is limited. Particularly, if we consider smart systems that actually interact with learners in a knowledgeable way and as such support the learning process. It illustrates the fact that teaching professionally is a complex challenge that is beyond the capabilities of current autonomous robots. On the other hand, dedicated forms of Artificial Intelligence can be very good at certain things. For example, computers are excellent chess players and automated route planners easily outperform humans. To deploy this potential, experts argue for a hybrid approach in which humans and smart systems collaboratively accomplish goals. How to realize this for education? What does it entail in practice? In this contribution, we investigate the idea of a hybrid approach in secondary education. As a case-study, we focus on learners acquiring systems thinking skills and our recently for this purpose developed pedagogical approach. Particularly, we discuss the kind of Artificial Intelligence that is needed in this situation, as well as which tasks the software can perform well and which tasks are better, or necessarily, left with the teacher.
DOCUMENT
