Human Expertise in Algorithmic Prediction
Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:NNXMHHUArecord.jsonopen to challenge →
read the original abstract
We introduce a novel framework for incorporating human expertise into algorithmic predictions. Our approach leverages human judgment to distinguish inputs which are algorithmically indistinguishable, or "look the same" to predictive algorithms. We argue that this framing clarifies the problem of human-AI collaboration in prediction tasks, as experts often form judgments by drawing on information which is not encoded in an algorithm's training data. Algorithmic indistinguishability yields a natural test for assessing whether experts incorporate this kind of "side information", and further provides a simple but principled method for selectively incorporating human feedback into algorithmic predictions. We show that this method provably improves the performance of any feasible algorithmic predictor and precisely quantify this improvement. We find empirically that although algorithms often outperform their human counterparts on average, human judgment can improve algorithmic predictions on specific instances (which can be identified ex-ante). In an X-ray classification task, we find that this subset constitutes nearly $30\%$ of the patient population. Our approach provides a natural way of uncovering this heterogeneity and thus enabling effective human-AI collaboration.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Understanding LoRA as Knowledge Memory: An Empirical Analysis
LoRA modules function as composable knowledge memories for LLMs with measurable storage capacity, internalization efficiency, and advantages in multi-module long-context reasoning.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.