Source author record

Zachary Lipton

Zachary Lipton appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

cs.CY Human-Computer Interaction Machine Learning

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works

3topics

4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Open graph Browse works

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

preprint2022arXiv

Homophily and Incentive Effects in Use of Algorithms

As algorithmic tools increasingly aid experts in making consequential decisions, the need to understand the precise factors that mediate their influence has grown commensurately. In this paper, we present a crowdsourcing vignette study designed to assess the impacts of two plausible factors on AI-informed decision-making. First, we examine homophily -- do people defer more to models that tend to agree with them? -- by manipulating the agreement during training between participants and the algorithmic tool. Second, we considered incentives -- how do people incorporate a (known) cost structure in the hybrid decision-making setting? -- by varying rewards associated with true positives vs. true negatives. Surprisingly, we found limited influence of either homophily and no evidence of incentive effects, despite participants performing similarly to previous studies. Higher levels of agreement between the participant and the AI tool yielded more confident predictions, but only when outcome feedback was absent. These results highlight the complexity of characterizing human-algorithm interactions, and suggest that findings from social psychology may require re-examination when humans interact with algorithms.

preprint2020arXiv

How Transferable are the Representations Learned by Deep Q Agents?

In this paper, we consider the source of Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL)'s sample complexity, asking how much derives from the requirement of learning useful representations of environment states and how much is due to the sample complexity of learning a policy. While for DRL agents, the distinction between representation and policy may not be clear, we seek new insight through a set of transfer learning experiments. In each experiment, we retain some fraction of layers trained on either the same game or a related game, comparing the benefits of transfer learning to learning a policy from scratch. Interestingly, we find that benefits due to transfer are highly variable in general and non-symmetric across pairs of tasks. Our experiments suggest that perhaps transfer from simpler environments can boost performance on more complex downstream tasks and that the requirements of learning a useful representation can range from negligible to the majority of the sample complexity, based on the environment. Furthermore, we find that fine-tuning generally outperforms training with the transferred layers frozen, confirming an insight first noted in the classification setting.