The Value of AI Advice: Personalized and Value-Maximizing AI Advisors Are Necessary to Reliably Benefit Experts and Organizations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Despite advances in AI's performance and interpretability, AI advisors can undermine experts' decisions and increase the time and effort experts must invest to make decisions. Consequently, AI systems deployed in high-stakes settings often fail to consistently add value across experts and organizations and can even diminish the value that experts alone provide. Beyond harm in specific domains, such outcomes impede progress in research and practice, underscoring the need to understand when and why different AI advisors add or diminish value. To bridge this gap, we stress the importance of assessing the value AI advice brings to real-world contexts when designing and evaluating AI advisors. Building on this perspective, we characterize key pillars -- pathways through which AI advice impacts value -- and develop a framework that incorporates these pillars to create reliable, personalized, and value-adding advisors. Our results highlight the need for value-driven development of AI advisors that advise selectively, are tailored to experts' unique behaviors, and are optimized for context-specific trade-offs between decision improvements and advising costs. They also reveal how the lack of inclusion of these pillars in the design of AI advising systems may be contributing to the failures observed in practical applications.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 82 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Dec 2024.
Builds on
24 of 82 references.
References · 24
- 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
- 2016A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networkscited by 2,385
- 2020Does the Whole Exceed its Parts? The Effect of AI Explanations on Complementary Team Performancecited by 399
- 2020Effect of Confidence and Explanation on Accuracy and Trust Calibration in AI-Assisted Decision Makingcited by 281
- 2020Consistent Estimators for Learning to Defer to an Expertcited by 271
- 2017Predict Responsibly: Improving Fairness and Accuracy by Learning to Defercited by 233
- 2015Interpretable classifiers using rules and Bayesian analysis: Building a better stroke prediction modelcited by 140
- 2019Human-Centered Tools for Coping with Imperfect Algorithms during Medical Decision-Makingcited by 109
- 2024When combinations of humans and AI are useful: A systematic review and meta-analysiscited by 106
- 2019The Dangers of Post-hoc Interpretability: Unjustified Counterfactual Explanationscited by 97
- 2022Calibrated Learning to Defer with One-vs-All Classifierscited by 69
- 2021Understanding the Effect of Out-of-distribution Examples and Interactive Explanations on Human-AI Decision Makingcited by 58
12 more
- 2021Scalable Rule-Based Representation Learning for Interpretable Classificationcited by 40
- 2019Generalized Linear Rule Modelscited by 36
- 2022Interpretability, Then What? Editing Machine Learning Models to Reflect Human Knowledge and Valuescited by 25
- 2020Model Distillation for Revenue Optimization: Interpretable Personalized Pricingcited by 24
- 2020Algorithmic Risk Assessments Can Alter Human Decision-Making Processes in High-Stakes Government Contextscited by 22
- 2022Learning When to Advise Human Decision Makerscited by 18
- 2022The Best Decisions Are Not the Best Advice: Making Adherence-Aware Recommendationscited by 16
- 2020A deep learning-based framework for segmenting invisible clinical target volumes with estimated uncertainties for post-operative prostate cancer radiotherapycited by 11
- 2019Fair-by-design explainable models for prediction of recidivismcited by 8
- 2022Constrained Prescriptive Trees via Column Generationcited by 6
- 2023The Potential Impact of AI Innovations on U.S. Occupationscited by 5
- 2023Learning Prescriptive ReLU Networkscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.