mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Shaping Human-AI Interactions to Provide Improvement Pathways and Balance Competing Objectives

arXiv 2608.05710 ↗First posted 6 Aug 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

When an AI system is deployed, the individuals who use and or are evaluated by it form beliefs about how the system operates and use those beliefs to strategically present their preferences, behaviors, or attributes. The system then responds with feedback or a decision outcome, thereby creating a human-AI interaction loop. This thesis studies how to design and shape such interactions to achieve three goals: (1) help individuals develop accurate beliefs about the AI systems so they can improve and or secure favorable outcomes at minimal cost, (2) encourage improvement and or discourage gaming behaviors, and (3) ensure that the AI system continues to achieve its intended objectives, such as maximizing accuracy. To address these goals, the thesis is organized into three complementary parts that examine and study human-AI interactions from the perspectives of both evaluated individuals and AI systems. Together, the work presented in this thesis advances human-centered machine learning by providing principles and methods for designing AI systems that align with human needs, values, and capabilities. Methodologically, this thesis integrates theoretical analysis, data-driven modeling, human-subject experiments, and empirical evaluations on real-world and semi-synthetic datasets.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 193 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Aug 2026.

Builds on

11 of 193 references.

References · 11

  1. 2019Towards Realistic Individual Recourse and Actionable Explanations in Black-Box Decision Making Systemscited by 131
  2. 2019Equalizing Recourse across Groupscited by 55
  3. 2020Gaming Helps! Learning from Strategic Interactions in Natural Dynamicscited by 15
  4. 2019Extracting Incentives from Black-Box Decisionscited by 8
  5. 2016Comparison of 14 different families of classification algorithms on 115 binary datasetscited by 6
  6. 2024Regularized Robustly Reliable Learners and Instance Targeted Attackscited by 5
  7. 2025How Strategic Agents Respond: Comparing Analytical Models with LLM-Generated Responses in Strategic Classificationcited by 5
  8. 2018Private Information, Credit Risk and Graph Structure in P2P Lending Networkscited by 3
  9. 2015Min-Max Kernelscited by 2
  10. 2025The Active and Noise-Tolerant Strategic Perceptroncited by 2
  11. 2026Revealing Positive and Negative Role Models to Help People Make Good Decisionscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.