mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

A Framework for Measuring Appropriate Reliance on Set-Valued AI Advice

arXiv 2606.06081 ↗First posted 4 Jun 2026cs.AI cs.HCcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Appropriate reliance on AI advice has become a central research theme in human-AI collaboration. Existing frameworks have focused exclusively on point predictions as AI advice. However, set-valued AI advice (e.g., discrete sets or continuous intervals) is increasingly being used to communicate uncertainty and improve human decision making. In this paper, we develop the first formal framework for measuring appropriate reliance on set-valued AI advice within the sequential judge-advisor paradigm, spanning both classification and regression tasks. For classification, we first introduce the dimensions that are necessary for evaluating set-valued AI advice. We then define two metrics: correct reliance rate on AI and correct reliance rate on self, which jointly characterize appropriate reliance in this setting. For regression, we introduce quantity of AI reliance and quality of AI reliance, which respectively measure whether a decision maker utilized the AI advice and whether their reliance helped them get closer to the ground truth relative to their initial estimate. Through the application of our framework, we demonstrate how these metrics capture important nuances in human-AI collaboration that existing measures overlook.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Jun 2026.

Builds on

18 of 44 references.

References · 18

  1. 2019Conformalized Quantile Regressioncited by 629
  2. 2020Does the Whole Exceed its Parts? The Effect of AI Explanations on Complementary Team Performancecited by 399
  3. 2019Bias in Bios: A Case Study of Semantic Representation Bias in a High-Stakes Settingcited by 349
  4. 2020Uncertainty as a Form of Transparency: Measuring, Communicating, and Using Uncertaintycited by 129
  5. 2022Explanations Can Reduce Overreliance on AI Systems During Decision-Makingcited by 111
  6. 2023Appropriate Reliance on AI Advice: Conceptualization and the Effect of Explanationscited by 83
  7. 2020Deciding Fast and Slow: The Role of Cognitive Biases in AI-assisted Decision-makingcited by 59
  8. 2023In Search of Verifiability: Explanations Rarely Enable Complementary Performance in AI-Advised Decision Makingcited by 50
  9. 2021The Flaws of Policies Requiring Human Oversight of Government Algorithmscited by 44
  10. 2023Knowing About Knowing: An Illusion of Human Competence Can Hinder Appropriate Reliance on AI Systemscited by 41
  11. 2024Conformal Prediction Sets Improve Human Decision Makingcited by 35
  12. 2024On the Quest for Effectiveness in Human Oversight: Interdisciplinary Perspectivescited by 28
6 more
  1. 2022Explanations, Fairness, and Appropriate Reliance in Human-AI Decision-Makingcited by 25
  2. 2024Evaluating the Utility of Conformal Prediction Sets for AI-Advised Image Labelingcited by 12
  3. 2023AI Reliance and Decision Quality: Fundamentals, Interdependence, and the Effects of Interventionscited by 9
  4. 2024To Err Is AI! Debugging as an Intervention to Facilitate Appropriate Reliance on AI Systemscited by 7
  5. 2025Automation Bias in the AI Act: On the Legal Implications of Attempting to De-Bias Human Oversight of AIcited by 7
  6. 2024A Survey of AI Reliancecited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.