The Impact of Snippet Reliability on Misinformation in Online Health Search

Search result snippets are crucial in modern search engines, providing users with a quick overview of a website's content. Snippets help users determine the relevance of a document to their information needs, and in certain scenarios even enable them to satisfy those needs without visiting web documents. Hence, it is crucial for snippets to reliably represent the content of their corresponding documents. While this may be a straightforward requirement for some queries, it can become challenging in the complex domain of healthcare, and can lead to misinformation. This paper aims to examine snippets' reliability in representing their corresponding documents, specifically in the health domain. To achieve this, we conduct a series of user studies using Google's search results, where participants are asked to infer viewpoints of search results pertaining to queries about the effectiveness of a medical intervention for a medical condition, based solely on their titles and snippets. Our findings reveal that a considerable portion of Google's snippets (28%) failed to present any viewpoint on the intervention's effectiveness, and that 35% were interpreted by participants as having a different viewpoint compared to their corresponding documents. To address this issue, we propose a snippet extraction solution tailored directly to users' information needs, i.e., extracting snippets that summarize documents' viewpoints regarding the intervention and condition that appear in the query. User study demonstrates that our information need-focused solution outperforms the mainstream query-based approach. With only 19.67% of snippets generated by our solution reported as not presenting a viewpoint and a mere 20.33% misinterpreted by participants. These results strongly suggest that an information need-focused approach can significantly improve the reliability of extracted snippets in online health search.

Cognitive Effects in Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT have received enormous attention over the past year and are now used by hundreds of millions of people every day. The rapid adoption of this technology naturally raises questions about the possible biases such models might exhibit. In this work, we tested one of these models (GPT-3) on a range of cognitive effects, which are systematic patterns that are usually found in human cognitive tasks. We found that LLMs are indeed prone to several human cognitive effects. Specifically, we show that the priming, distance, SNARC, and size congruity effects were presented with GPT-3, while the anchoring effect is absent. We describe our methodology, and specifically the way we converted real-world experiments to text-based experiments. Finally, we speculate on the possible reasons why GPT-3 exhibits these effects and discuss whether they are imitated or reinvented.

Contrastive Explanations of Multi-agent Optimization Solutions

In many real-world scenarios, agents are involved in optimization problems. Since most of these scenarios are over-constrained, optimal solutions do not always satisfy all agents. Some agents might be unhappy and ask questions of the form ``Why does solution $S$ not satisfy property $P$?''. In this paper, we propose MAoE, a domain-independent approach to obtain contrastive explanations by (i) generating a new solution $S^\prime$ where the property $P$ is enforced, while also minimizing the differences between $S$ and $S^\prime$; and (ii) highlighting the differences between the two solutions. Such explanations aim to help agents understanding why the initial solution is better than what they expected. We have carried out a computational evaluation that shows that MAoE can generate contrastive explanations for large multi-agent optimization problems. We have also performed an extensive user study in four different domains that shows that, after being presented with these explanations, humans' satisfaction with the original solution increases.

Explainable Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning for Temporal Queries

As multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) systems are increasingly deployed throughout society, it is imperative yet challenging for users to understand the emergent behaviors of MARL agents in complex environments. This work presents an approach for generating policy-level contrastive explanations for MARL to answer a temporal user query, which specifies a sequence of tasks completed by agents with possible cooperation. The proposed approach encodes the temporal query as a PCTL logic formula and checks if the query is feasible under a given MARL policy via probabilistic model checking. Such explanations can help reconcile discrepancies between the actual and anticipated multi-agent behaviors. The proposed approach also generates correct and complete explanations to pinpoint reasons that make a user query infeasible. We have successfully applied the proposed approach to four benchmark MARL domains (up to 9 agents in one domain). Moreover, the results of a user study show that the generated explanations significantly improve user performance and satisfaction.

A Coupled Flow Approach to Imitation Learning

In reinforcement learning and imitation learning, an object of central importance is the state distribution induced by the policy. It plays a crucial role in the policy gradient theorem, and references to it--along with the related state-action distribution--can be found all across the literature. Despite its importance, the state distribution is mostly discussed indirectly and theoretically, rather than being modeled explicitly. The reason being an absence of appropriate density estimation tools. In this work, we investigate applications of a normalizing flow-based model for the aforementioned distributions. In particular, we use a pair of flows coupled through the optimality point of the Donsker-Varadhan representation of the Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence, for distribution matching based imitation learning. Our algorithm, Coupled Flow Imitation Learning (CFIL), achieves state-of-the-art performance on benchmark tasks with a single expert trajectory and extends naturally to a variety of other settings, including the subsampled and state-only regimes.

Resource Sharing Through Multi-Round Matchings

Applications such as employees sharing office spaces over a workweek can be modeled as problems where agents are matched to resources over multiple rounds. Agents' requirements limit the set of compatible resources and the rounds in which they want to be matched. Viewing such an application as a multi-round matching problem on a bipartite compatibility graph between agents and resources, we show that a solution (i.e., a set of matchings, with one matching per round) can be found efficiently if one exists. To cope with situations where a solution does not exist, we consider two extensions. In the first extension, a benefit function is defined for each agent and the objective is to find a multi-round matching to maximize the total benefit. For a general class of benefit functions satisfying certain properties (including diminishing returns), we show that this multi-round matching problem is efficiently solvable. This class includes utilitarian and Rawlsian welfare functions. For another benefit function, we show that the maximization problem is NP-hard. In the second extension, the objective is to generate advice to each agent (i.e., a subset of requirements to be relaxed) subject to a budget constraint so that the agent can be matched. We show that this budget-constrained advice generation problem is NP-hard. For this problem, we develop an integer linear programming formulation as well as a heuristic based on local search. We experimentally evaluate our algorithms on synthetic networks and apply them to two real-world situations: shared office spaces and matching courses to classrooms.

Artificial Intelligence and Life in 2030: The One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence

In September 2016, Stanford's "One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence" project (AI100) issued the first report of its planned long-term periodic assessment of artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on society. It was written by a panel of 17 study authors, each of whom is deeply rooted in AI research, chaired by Peter Stone of the University of Texas at Austin. The report, entitled "Artificial Intelligence and Life in 2030," examines eight domains of typical urban settings on which AI is likely to have impact over the coming years: transportation, home and service robots, healthcare, education, public safety and security, low-resource communities, employment and workplace, and entertainment. It aims to provide the general public with a scientifically and technologically accurate portrayal of the current state of AI and its potential and to help guide decisions in industry and governments, as well as to inform research and development in the field. The charge for this report was given to the panel by the AI100 Standing Committee, chaired by Barbara Grosz of Harvard University.

Efficient Customer Service Combining Human Operators and Virtual Agents

The prospect of combining human operators and virtual agents (bots) into an effective hybrid system that provides proper customer service to clients is promising yet challenging. The hybrid system decreases the customers' frustration when bots are unable to provide appropriate service and increases their satisfaction when they prefer to interact with human operators. Furthermore, we show that it is possible to decrease the cost and efforts of building and maintaining such virtual agents by enabling the virtual agent to incrementally learn from the human operators. We employ queuing theory to identify the key parameters that govern the behavior and efficiency of such hybrid systems and determine the main parameters that should be optimized in order to improve the service. We formally prove, and demonstrate in extensive simulations and in a user study, that with the proper choice of parameters, such hybrid systems are able to increase the number of served clients while simultaneously decreasing their expected waiting time and increasing satisfaction.

Resource Allocation to Agents with Restrictions: Maximizing Likelihood with Minimum Compromise

Many scenarios where agents with restrictions compete for resources can be cast as maximum matching problems on bipartite graphs. Our focus is on resource allocation problems where agents may have restrictions that make them incompatible with some resources. We assume that a Principle chooses a maximum matching randomly so that each agent is matched to a resource with some probability. Agents would like to improve their chances of being matched by modifying their restrictions within certain limits. The Principle's goal is to advise an unsatisfied agent to relax its restrictions so that the total cost of relaxation is within a budget (chosen by the agent) and the increase in the probability of being assigned a resource is maximized. We establish hardness results for some variants of this budget-constrained maximization problem and present algorithmic results for other variants. We experimentally evaluate our methods on synthetic datasets as well as on two novel real-world datasets: a vacation activities dataset and a classrooms dataset.

Not Just Skipping. Understanding the Effect of Sponsored Content on Users' Decision-Making in Online Health Search

Advertisements (ads) are an innate part of search engine business models. Advertisers are willing to pay search engines to promote their content to a prominent position in the search result page (SERP). This raises concerns about the search engine manipulation effect (SEME): the opinions of users can be influenced by the way search results are presented. In this work, we investigate the connection between SEME and sponsored content in the health domain. We conduct a series of user studies in which participants need to evaluate the effectiveness of different non-prescription natural remedies for various medical conditions. We present participants SERPs with different intentionally created biases towards certain viewpoints, with or without sponsored content, and ask them to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment only based on the information presented to them. We investigate two types of sponsored content: 1. Direct marketing ads that directly market the product without expressing an opinion about its effectiveness, and 2. Indirect marketing ads that explicitly advocate the product's effectiveness on the condition in the query. Our results reveal a significant difference between the influence on users from these two ad types. Though direct marketing ads are mostly skipped by users, they can tilt users decision making towards more positive viewpoints. Indirect marketing ads affect both the users' examination behaviour and their perception of the treatment's effectiveness. We further discover that the contrast between the indirect marketing ads and the viewpoint presented in the organic search results plays an important role in users' decision-making. When the contrast is high, users exhibit a strong preference towards a negative viewpoint, and when the contrast is low or none, users exhibit preference towards a more positive viewpoint.