Although artificial intelligence holds promise for addressing societ al challenges, issues of exactly which tasks to automate and the extent to do so remain understudied. We approach the problem of task delegability from a human-centered perspective by developing a framework on human perception of task delegation to artificial intelligence. We consider four high-level factors that can contribute to a delegation decision: motivation, difficulty, risk, and trust. To obtain an empirical understanding of human preferences in different tasks, we build a dataset of 100 tasks from academic papers, popular media portrayal of AI, and everyday life. For each task, we administer a survey to collect judgments of each factor and ask subjects to pick the extent to which they prefer AI involvement. We find little preference for full AI control and a strong preference for machine-in-the-loop designs, in which humans play the leading role. Our framework can effectively predict human preferences in degrees of AI assistance. Among the four factors, trust is the most predictive of human preferences of optimal human-machine delegation. This framework represents a first step towards characterizing human preferences of automation across tasks. We hope this work may encourage and aid in future efforts towards understanding such individual attitudes; our goal is to inform the public and the AI research community rather than dictating any direction in technology development.
Shared-control design paradigms. Many tasks are amen-able to a mix of human and machine control. Mixed-initiative systems and collaborative control have gained traction over function allocation @cite_26 @cite_38 , mainly through recognition that such systems can transform the task itself through conflicts and interdependence @cite_34 .
@cite_38 @cite_26 @cite_34
2059216172 2028626340
Recent debate has centered on the relative promise of focusinguser-interface research on developing new metaphors and tools thatenhance users abilities to directly manipulate objects versusdirecting effort toward developing interface agents that provideautomation. In this paper, we review principles that show promisefor allowing engineers to enhance human-computer interactionthrough an elegant coupling of automated services with directmanipulation. Key ideas will be highlighted in terms of the Lookoutsystem for scheduling and meeting management. Coactive Design is a new approach to address the increasingly sophisticated roles that people and robots play as the use of robots expands into new, complex domains. The approach is motivated by the desire for robots to perform less like teleoperated tools or independent automatons and more like interdependent teammates. In this article, we describe what it means to be interdependent, why this is important, and the design implications that follow from this perspective. We argue for a human-robot system model that supports interdependence through careful attention to requirements for observability, predictability, and directability. We present a Coactive Design method and show how it can be a useful approach for developers trying to understand how to translate high-level teamwork concepts into reusable control algorithms, interface elements, and behaviors that enable robots to fulfill their envisioned role as teammates. As an example of the coactive design approach, we present our results from the DARPA Virtual Robotics Challenge, a competition designed to spur development of advanced robots that can assist humans in recovering from natural and man-made disasters. Twenty-six teams from eight countries competed in three different tasks providing an excellent evaluation of the relative effectiveness of different approaches to human-machine system design.