arXiv AI By Dingwen Kong, Liang Lyu, Saurabh Amin, Amine Bennouna, Daniel Huttenlocher, Asuman Ozdaglar

AI-Assisted Classification under Correlation Neglect and Trust

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The paper investigates when AI assistance improves or harms human decision-making by modeling human awareness of evidence overlap and trust in the AI. It presents a closed‑form phase diagram showing regions of complementarity, impairment, and automation, and demonstrates that neglecting overlap can make a more capable AI less accurate. Empirical tests on ChatBench reveal that AI assistance boosts accuracy, but workers underweight AI signals, and trust calibration can partially recover lost performance for some models.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv Machine Learning
Oct 15

Smart Alone, Blind Together: Why Accuracy Fails to CertifyTheory of Mind in Multi-Agent Teams

The paper argues that accuracy is an inadequate metric for certifying a coordinator’s theory‑of‑mind in multi‑agent systems, because the required accuracy depends on deployment‑specific costs and errors are often dependent. Experiments on task assignment, Level‑Based Foraging, Hanabi, and human judgments show that accuracy can both approve harmful language‑model deployments and reject beneficial ones. The authors propose a Blind‑Spot Gate that evaluates error costs, pairwise interactions, and dependence without deployment, achieving better safety outcomes than accuracy alone.

By Will Beaumaster, Paul Schrater
arXiv AI
Oct 1

Referential Uncertainty in Human--AI Collaboration

The study investigates how humans and AI collaborate on a puzzle task, focusing on referential uncertainty—when a description could refer to multiple objects. It finds that eliciting a belief distribution over candidate pieces yields better calibration and discrimination than raw action probabilities, and that precise descriptions or well‑targeted hedges significantly reduce the acceptance of wrong placements. However, the AI rarely externalizes uncertainty, and poorly targeted hedges can be counterproductive.

By Christian Poelitz, Finale Doshi-Velez, Si\^an Lindley
arXiv AI
Sep 11

AgentAudit: An Open, Extensible Framework for Full-Lifecycle Trust Evaluation of AI Agents

AgentAudit is an open, extensible framework that evaluates the full lifecycle of AI agents, assessing planning, tool selection, execution, memory, and reasoning across ten dimensions such as instruction integrity, security, and alignment. Unlike existing benchmarks that focus on single aspects, AgentAudit analyzes the entire execution trace to attribute failures to specific stages. The framework was tested on five large language models, revealing significant differences in trustworthiness even among models with similar task‑completion performance.

By Shrey Nag, Sachita, Abhishek Kumar Singh, Lipi Goel, Rajeshwar Singh Janwar