An official website of the United States government
In human-aware planning systems, a planning agent might need to explain its plan to a human user when that plan appears to be non-feasible or sub-optimal. A popular approach, called model reconciliation, has been proposed as a way to bring the model of the human user closer to the agent’s model. To do so, the agent provides an explanation that can be used to update the model of human such that the agent’s plan is feasible or optimal to the human user. Existing approaches to solve this problem have been based on automated planning methods and have been limited to classical planning problems only. In this paper, we approach the model reconciliation problem from a different perspective, that of knowledge representation and reasoning, and demonstrate that our approach can be applied not only to classical planning problems but also hybrid systems planning problems with durative actions and events/processes. In particular, we propose a logic-based framework for explanation generation, where given a knowledge base KBa (of an agent) and a knowledge base KBh (of a human user), each encoding their knowledge of a planning problem, and that KBa entails a query q (e.g., that a proposed plan of the agent is valid), the goal is to identify an explanation ε ⊆ KBa such that when it is used to update KBh, then the updated KBh also entails q. More specifically, we make the following contributions in this paper: (1) We formally define the notion of logic-based explanations in the context of model reconciliation problems; (2) We introduce a number of cost functions that can be used to reflect preferences between explanations; (3) We present algorithms to compute explanations for both classical planning and hybrid systems planning problems; and (4) We empirically evaluate their performance on such problems. Our empirical results demonstrate that, on classical planning problems, our approach is faster than the state of the art when the explanations are long or when the size of the knowledge base is small (e.g., the plans to be explained are short). They also demonstrate that our approach is efficient for hybrid systems planning problems. Finally, we evaluate the real-world efficacy of explanations generated by our algorithms through a controlled human user study, where we develop a proof-of-concept visualization system and use it as a medium for explanation communication.
more »
« less
Explanation as Question Answering based on a Task Model of the Agent’s Design
We describe a human-centered and design-based stance towards generating explanations in AI agents. We collect questions about the working of an AI agent through participatory design by fo- cus groups. We capture an agent’s design through a Task-Method-Knowledge model that explicitly specifies the agent’s tasks and goals, as well as the mechanisms, knowledge and vocabulary it uses for accomplishing the tasks. We illustrate our approach through the generation of explanations in Skillsync, an AI agent that links companies and colleges for worker upskilling and reskilling. In particular, we embed a question-answering agent called AskJill in Skillsync, where AskJill contains a TMK model of Skillsync’s design. AskJill presently answers human-generated questions about Skillsync’s tasks and vocabulary, and thereby helps explain how it produces its recommendations.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10346138
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Procs. IJCAI-2022 Workshop on Explainable AI
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Explanations of AI Agents' actions are considered to be an important factor in improving users' trust in the decisions made by autonomous AI systems. However, as these autonomous systems evolve from reactive, i.e., acting on user input, to proactive, i.e., acting without requiring user intervention, there is a need to explore how the explanation for the actions of these agents should evolve. In this work, we explore the design of explanations through participatory design methods for a proactive auto-response messaging agent that can reduce perceived obligations and social pressure to respond quickly to incoming messages by providing unavailability-related context. We recruited 14 participants who worked in pairs during collaborative design sessions where they reasoned about the agent's design and actions. We qualitatively analyzed the data collected through these sessions and found that participants' reasoning about agent actions led them to speculate heavily on its design. These speculations significantly influenced participants' desire for explanations and the controls they sought to inform the agents' behavior. Our findings indicate a need to transform users' speculations into accurate mental models of agent design. Further, since the agent acts as a mediator in human-human communication, it is also necessary to account for social norms in its explanation design. Finally, user expertise in understanding their habits and behaviors allows the agent to learn from the user their preferences when justifying its actions.more » « less
-
Large language models (LLM) are perceived to offer promising potentials for automating security tasks, such as those found in security operation centers (SOCs). As a first step towards evaluating this perceived potential, we investigate the use of LLMs in software pentesting, where the main task is to automatically identify software security vulnerabilities in source code. We hypothesize that an LLM-based AI agent can be improved over time for a specific security task as human operators interact with it. Such improvement can be made, as a first step, by engineering prompts fed to the LLM based on the responses produced, to include relevant contexts and structures so that the model provides more accurate results. Such engineering efforts become sustainable if the prompts that are engineered to produce better results on current tasks, also produce better results on future unknown tasks. To examine this hypothesis, we utilize the OWASP Benchmark Project 1.2 which contains 2,740 hand-crafted source code test cases containing various types of vulnerabilities. We divide the test cases into training and testing data, where we engineer the prompts based on the training data (only), and evaluate the final system on the testing data. We compare the AI agent’s performance on the testing data against the performance of the agent without the prompt engineering. We also compare the AI agent’s results against those from SonarQube, a widely used static code analyzer for security testing. We built and tested multiple versions of the AI agent using different off-the-shelf LLMs – Google’s Gemini-pro, as well as OpenAI’s GPT-3.5-Turbo and GPT-4-Turbo (with both chat completion and assistant APIs). The results show that using LLMs is a viable approach to build an AI agent for software pentesting that can improve through repeated use and prompt engineering.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)In this paper we explore what role humans might play in designing tools for reinforcement learning (RL) agents to interact with the world. Recent work has explored RL methods that optimize a robot’s morphology while learning to control it, effectively dividing an RL agent’s environment into the external world and the agent’s interface with the world. Taking a user-centered design (UCD) approach, we explore the potential of a human, instead of an algorithm, redesigning the agent’s tool. Using UCD to design for a machine learning agent brings up several research questions, including what it means to understand an RL agent’s experience, beliefs, tendencies, and goals. After discussing these questions, we then present a system we developed to study humans designing a 2D racecar for an RL autonomous driver. We conclude with findings and insights from exploratory pilots with twelve users using this system.more » « less
-
AI-enabled agents designed to assist humans are gaining traction in a variety of domains such as healthcare and disaster response. It is evident that, as we move forward, these agents will play increasingly vital roles in our lives. To realize this future successfully and mitigate its unintended consequences, it is imperative that humans have a clear understanding of the agents that they work with. Policy summarization methods help facilitate this understanding by showcasing key examples of agent behaviors to their human users. Yet, existing methods produce “one-size-fits-all” summaries for a generic audience ahead of time. Drawing inspiration from research in pedagogy, we posit that personalized policy summaries can more effectively enhance user understanding. To evaluate this hypothesis, this paper presents and benchmarks a novel technique: Personalized Policy Summarization (PPS). PPS discerns a user’s mental model of the agent through a series of algorithmically generated questions and crafts customized policy summaries to enhance user understanding. Unlike existing methods, PPS actively engages with users to gauge their comprehension of the agent behavior, subsequently generating tailored explanations on the fly. Through a combination of numerical and human subject experiments, we confirm the utility of this personalized approach to explainable AI.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
