Add application of incremental trust model
This commit is contained in:
parent
f14ee141b4
commit
2b400be64d
@ -160,15 +160,50 @@ model: trustworthiness. Trustworthiness can be defined as the cognitive belief
|
|||||||
of $X$ that $Y$ is trustworthy. Reflective trust involves a cognitive process
|
of $X$ that $Y$ is trustworthy. Reflective trust involves a cognitive process
|
||||||
which allows a trustor to obtain reasons for trusting a potential trustee. $X$
|
which allows a trustor to obtain reasons for trusting a potential trustee. $X$
|
||||||
believes in the trustworthiness of $Y$ because there are reasons for $Y$ being
|
believes in the trustworthiness of $Y$ because there are reasons for $Y$ being
|
||||||
trustworthy. Similarly to simple trust, reflective trust is still missing the
|
trustworthy. Contrary to simple trust, reflective trust includes the aspect of
|
||||||
aspect of control. Reflective trust does not have to be expressed in binary
|
control. For an agent $X$ to \emph{reflectively} trust another agent $Y$, $X$
|
||||||
form but can also be expressed by a subjective measure of confidence. The more
|
has objective reasons to trust $Y$ but is not willing to do so without control.
|
||||||
likely a trustee $Y$ is to perform action $A$ towards a goal $G$, the higher
|
Reflective trust does not have to be expressed in binary form but can also be
|
||||||
$X$'s confidence in $Y$ is. Additionally, $X$ might have high reflective trust
|
expressed by a subjective measure of confidence. The more likely a trustee $Y$
|
||||||
in $Y$ but still does not trust $Y$ to perform a given task because of other,
|
is to perform action $A$ towards a goal $G$, the higher $X$'s confidence in $Y$
|
||||||
potentially unconscious, reasons.
|
is. Additionally, $X$ might have high reflective trust in $Y$ but still does not
|
||||||
|
trust $Y$ to perform a given task because of other, potentially unconscious,
|
||||||
|
reasons.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\subsubsection{Pragmatic Trust}
|
\subsubsection{Pragmatic Trust} is the last form of trust in the incremental
|
||||||
|
model proposed by \cite{ferrario_ai_2020}. In addition to having objective
|
||||||
|
reasons to trust $Y$, $X$ is also willing to do so without control. It is thus a
|
||||||
|
combination of simple trust and reflective trust. Simple trust provides the
|
||||||
|
non-cognitive, non-controlling aspect of trust and reflective trust provides the
|
||||||
|
cognitive aspect.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
\subsection{Application of the Model}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Since the incremental model of trust can be applied to human-human as well as
|
||||||
|
human-AI interactions, an example which draws from both domains will be
|
||||||
|
presented. The setting is that of a company which ships tailor-made machine
|
||||||
|
learning (ML) solutions to other firms. On the human-human interaction side
|
||||||
|
there are multiple teams working on different aspects of the software. The
|
||||||
|
hierarchical structure between bosses, their team leaders and their developers
|
||||||
|
is composed of different forms of trust. A boss has worked with a specific team
|
||||||
|
leader in the past and thus knows from experience that the team leader can be
|
||||||
|
trusted without control (paradigmatic trust). The team leader has had this
|
||||||
|
particular team for a number of projects already but has recently hired a new
|
||||||
|
junior developer. The team leader has some objective proof that the new hire is
|
||||||
|
capable of delivering good work on time due to impressive credentials but needs
|
||||||
|
more time to be able to trust the new colleague without control (reflective
|
||||||
|
trust).
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
On the human-AI side, one developer is working on a machine learning algorithm
|
||||||
|
to achieve a specific goal $G$. Taking the 5-tuple from the incremental model,
|
||||||
|
$X$ is the developer, $Y$ is the machine learning algorithm and $A$ is the
|
||||||
|
action the machine learning algorithm takes to achieve the goal $G$. In the
|
||||||
|
beginning, $X$ does not yet trust $Y$ to do its job properly. This is due to an
|
||||||
|
absence of any past performance metric of the algorithm to achieve $G$. While
|
||||||
|
most, if not all, parameters of $Y$ have to be controlled by $X$ in the
|
||||||
|
beginning, there is less and less control needed if $Y$ achieves $G$
|
||||||
|
consistently. This also increases the cognitive trust in $Y$ as time goes on due
|
||||||
|
to accurate performance metrics.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\section{Taxonomy for Trustworthy AI}
|
\section{Taxonomy for Trustworthy AI}
|
||||||
\label{sec:taxonomy}
|
\label{sec:taxonomy}
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user