To Err is AI

Alba Bisante¹, Alan Dix^2,3, Emanuele Panizzi¹, Stefano Zeppieri¹

¹ Department of Computer Science, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy
² Computational Foundry, Swansea University, Wales, UK
³ Cardiff Metropolitan University, Wales, UK

Abstract

In this work, we analyze the different contexts in which one chooses to integrate artificial intelligence into an interface and the implications of this choice in managing user interaction. While AI in systems can provide significant benefits, it is not infallible and can make errors that seriously affect users. We aim to understand how to design more robust human-AI systems so that these initial AI errors do not lead to more catastrophic failures. To prevent failures, it is essential to detect errors as early as possible and have clear mechanisms to repair them. However, detecting errors in AI systems can be challenging. Therefore, we examine various approaches to error detection and repair, including post-hoc estimation, the use of traces and ambiguity, and multiple sensor layers.

Keywords: HCI, AI, errors, failures, error detection, error repair, user perception, interaction design

Refereences

1. Enrico Bassetti, Andrea Berti, Alba Bisante, Andrea Magnante, and Emanuele Panizzi. 2022. Exploiting User Behavior to Predict Parking Availability through Machine Learning. Smart Cities 5, 4 (2022), 1243–1266. https://doi.org/10.3390/ smartcities5040064
2. Enrico Bassetti, Alessio Luciani, and Emanuele Panizzi. 2021. ML Classification of Car Parking with Implicit Interaction on the Driver’s Smartphone. 291–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85613-7_21
3. Alba Bisante, Venkata Srikanth Varma Datla, Stefano Zeppieri, and Emanuele Panizzi. 2022. Implicit Interaction Approach for Car-Related Tasks On Smart- phone Applications - A Demo. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Con- ference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (Frascati, Rome, Italy) (AVI 2022). Asso- ciation for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 78, 3 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3531073.3534465
4. Alba Bisante, Emanuele Panizzi, and Stefano Zeppieri. 2022. Implicit Interaction Approach for Car-Related Tasks On Smartphone Applications. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (Frascati, Rome, Italy) (AVI 2022). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 39, 5 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3531073.3531173
5. Stephen A Brewster, Peter C Wright, Alan J Dix, and Alistair DN Edwards. 1995. The sonic enhancement of graphical buttons. Human—Computer Interaction: Interact’95 (1995), 43–48.
6. M. Chalmers, I. MacColl, and M. Bell. 2003. Seamful design: showing the seams in wearable computing. In 2003 IEE Eurowearable. 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1049/ic: 20030140
7. Allen Cypher. 2000. Eager: Programming Repetitive Tasks By Example. Proceed- ings of CHI’91 (04 2000). https://doi.org/10.1145/108844.108850
8. Jeffrey Dean and Sanjay Ghemawat. 2008. MapReduce: Simplified Data Processing on Large Clusters. Commun. ACM 51, 1 (jan 2008), 107–113. https://doi.org/10. 1145/1327452.1327492
9. Alan Dix. 2017. Activity modelling for low-intention interaction. In The Handbook of Formal Methods in Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 183–210.
10. Alan Dix, Russell Beale, and Andy Wood. 2000. Architectures to make simple visualisations using simple systems. In Proceedings of the working conference on Advanced visual interfaces. 51–60.
11. Marina Dodigovic. 2007. Artificial Intelligence and Second Language Learning: An Efficient Approach to Error Remediation. Language Awareness - LANG AWARE 16 (05 2007), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.2167/la416.0
12. David Frohlich, Paul Drew, and Andrew Monk. 1994. Management of repair in human-computer interaction. Human–Computer Interaction 9, 3-4 (1994), 385–425.
13. Jakob Nielsen. 1994. Heuristic Evaluation. In Usability Inspection Methods, J. Nielsen and RL Mack (Eds.). John Wiley & Sons, New York, Chapter 2.
14. Donald A Norman. 1988. The psychology of everyday things. Basic books.
15. Emanuele Panizzi and Alba Bisante. 2022. Private or Public Parking Type Clas- sifier on the Driver’s Smartphone. Procedia Computer Science 198 (2022), 231– 236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.12.233 12th International Conference on Emerging Ubiquitous Systems and Pervasive Networks / 11th International Conference on Current and Future Trends of Information and Communication Technologies in Healthcare.
16. R. Parasuraman, T.B. Sheridan, and C.D. Wickens. 2000. A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans 30, 3 (2000), 286–297. https: //doi.org/10.1109/3468.844354
17. Stephen Russell, Ira S. Moskowitz, and Adrienne Raglin. 2017. Human Information Interaction, Artificial Intelligence, and Errors. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 71–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59719-5_4
18. SAE International. 2018. Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles. SAE international 4970, 724 (2018), 1–5.
19. SAE International. 2021. SAE Levels of Driving AutomationTM Refined for Clarity and International Audience. SAE Blog, posted: Monday, May 3, 2021, https://www.sae.org/blog/sae-j3016-update.
20. Ben Shneiderman. 2022. Human-centered AI. Oxford University Press.
21. Ben Shneiderman, Catherine Plaisant, Maxine S Cohen, Steven Jacobs, Niklas Elmqvist, and Nicholas Diakopoulos. 2016. Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human-computer interaction. Pearson.

https://alandix.com/academic/papers/CHItaly2023-to-err-is-ai/

Alan Dix 19/10/2023