You could display the confidence or click through to the reasoning. Then the user can better understand the quality of the answer.
Sent from my iPad
On 17 Jun 2017, at 5:08 am, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps of interest.
Pine
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Chris Koerner ckoerner@wikimedia.org Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 8:31 AM Subject: [Design] Design in the Era of the Algorithm To: design@lists.wikimedia.org
Josh Clark on design principles for addressing flaws in machine learning. (via waxy.org)\
"The answer machines have an overconfidence problem. It’s not only a data-science problem that the algorithm returns bad conclusions. It’s a problem of presentation: the interface suggests that there’s one true answer, offering it up with a confidence that is unjustified.
So this is a design problem, too. The presentation fails to set appropriate expectations or context, and instead presents a bad answer with matter-of-fact assurance. As we learn to present machine-originated content, we face a very hard question: how might we add some productive humility to these interfaces to temper their overconfidence?
I have ideas."
https://bigmedium.com/speaking/design-in-the-era-of-the-algorithm.html
Yours, Chris Koerner Community Liaison - Discovery Wikimedia Foundation
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l