Indecision Modeling
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
AI systems are often used to make or contribute to important decisions in a growing range of applications, including criminal justice, hiring, and medicine. Since these decisions impact human lives, it is important that the AI systems act in ways which align with human values. Techniques for preference modeling and social choice help researchers learn and aggregate peoples' preferences, which are used to guide AI behavior; thus, it is imperative that these learned preferences are accurate. These techniques often assume that people are willing to express strict preferences over alternatives; which is not true in practice. People are often indecisive, and especially so when their decision has moral implications. The philosophy and psychology literature shows that indecision is a measurable and nuanced behavior -- and that there are several different reasons people are indecisive. This complicates the task of both learning and aggregating preferences, since most of the relevant literature makes restrictive assumptions on the meaning of indecision. We begin to close this gap by formalizing several mathematical indecision models based on theories from philosophy, psychology, and economics; these models can be used to describe (indecisive) agent decisions, both when they are allowed to express indecision and when they are not. We test these models using data collected from an online survey where participants choose how to (hypothetically) allocate organs to patients waiting for a transplant.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 15 Dec 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 4; 2025: 2.
8 papers.
- 2024Social Choice Should Guide AI Alignment in Dealing with Diverse Human Feedbackcited by 100
- 2025Can AI Model the Complexities of Human Moral Decision-Making? A Qualitative Study of Kidney Allocation Decisionscited by 9
- 2023Deploying a Robust Active Preference Elicitation Algorithm on MTurk: Experiment Design, Interface, and Evaluation for COVID-19 Patient Prioritizationcited by 8
- 2024On the Pros and Cons of Active Learning for Moral Preference Elicitationcited by 7
- 2024On The Stability of Moral Preferences: A Problem with Computational Elicitation Methodscited by 7
- 2023(Ir)rationality in AI: State of the Art, Research Challenges and Open Questionscited by 5
- 2025Who Gets the Kidney? Human-AI Alignment, Indecision, and Moral Valuescited by 2
- 2024Why should we ever automate moral decision making?cited by 0
- 2025Who Gets the Kidney? Human-AI Alignment, Indecision, and Moral Values30 May 2025
- 2025Can AI Model the Complexities of Human Moral Decision-Making? A Qualitative Study of Kidney Allocation Decisions2 Mar 2025
- 2024On The Stability of Moral Preferences: A Problem with Computational Elicitation Methods5 Aug 2024
- 2024On the Pros and Cons of Active Learning for Moral Preference Elicitation26 Jul 2024
- 2024Why should we ever automate moral decision making?10 Jul 2024
- 2024Social Choice Should Guide AI Alignment in Dealing with Diverse Human Feedback16 Apr 2024
- 2023(Ir)rationality in AI: State of the Art, Research Challenges and Open Questions28 Nov 2023
- 2023Deploying a Robust Active Preference Elicitation Algorithm on MTurk: Experiment Design, Interface, and Evaluation for COVID-19 Patient Prioritization6 Jun 2023