Does Calibration Affect Human Actions?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Calibration has been proposed as a way to enhance the reliability and adoption of machine learning classifiers. We study a particular aspect of this proposal: how does calibrating a classification model affect the decisions made by non-expert humans consuming the model's predictions? We perform a Human-Computer-Interaction (HCI) experiment to ascertain the effect of calibration on (i) trust in the model, and (ii) the correlation between decisions and predictions. We also propose further corrections to the reported calibrated scores based on Kahneman and Tversky's prospect theory from behavioral economics, and study the effect of these corrections on trust and decision-making. We find that calibration is not sufficient on its own; the prospect theory correction is crucial for increasing the correlation between human decisions and the model's predictions. While this increased correlation suggests higher trust in the model, responses to ``Do you trust the model more?" are unaffected by the method used.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Aug 2025.
Builds on
6 of 36 references.
References · 6
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2019A Simple Baseline for Bayesian Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 560
- 2020Effect of Confidence and Explanation on Accuracy and Trust Calibration in AI-Assisted Decision Makingcited by 281
- 2018Dirichlet-based Gaussian Processes for Large-scale Calibrated Classificationcited by 51
- 2022Uncalibrated Models Can Improve Human-AI Collaborationcited by 26
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.