| dc.description.abstract | Despite the transformational success of machine learning across various applications, examples of deployed models failing to recognize and support human-centered (HC) criteria are abundant. In this thesis, I conceptualize the space of human-machine collaboration with respect to two components: interpretation of people by machines and interpretation of machines by people. I develop several tools that make improvements along these axes.
First, I develop a pipeline that predicts depressive symptoms rated by clinicians from real-world longitudinal data outperforming several baselines. Second, I introduce a novel, model-agnostic, and dataset-agnostic method to approximate interactive human evaluation in open-domain dialog through self-play that is more strongly correlated with human evaluations than other automated metrics commonly used today. While dialog quality evaluation metrics predominantly use word-level overlap or distance metrics based on embedding resemblance to each turn of the conversation, I show the significance of taking into account the conversation's trajectory and using proxies such as sentiment, semantics, and user engagement that are psychologically motivated. Third, I demonstrate an uncertainty measurement technique that helps disambiguate annotator disagreement and data bias. I show that this characterization also improves model performance. Finally, I present a novel method that allows humans to investigate a predictor's decision-making process to gain better insight into how it works. The method jointly trains a generator, a discriminator, and a concept disentangler, allowing the human to ask "what-if" questions. I evaluate it on several challenging synthetic and realistic datasets where previous methods fall short of satisfying desirable criteria for interpretability and show that our method performs consistently well across all. I discuss its applications to detect potential biases of a classifier and identify spurious artifacts that impact predictions using simulated experiments.
Together, these novel techniques and insights provide a more comprehensive interpretation of people by machines and more powerful tools for interpretation of machines by people that can move us closer to HC optimality. | |
