Fair Decision Utility in Human-AI Collaboration: Interpretable Confidence Adjustment for Humans with Cognitive Disparities
Jiashi Gao, Kexin Liu, Xinwei Guo, Junlei Zhou, Jiaxin Zhang, Xiangyu Zhao, Guanhua Chen, Xin Yao, Xuetao Wei
Abstract
In AI-assisted decision-making, human decision-makers finalize decisions by taking into account both their human confidence and AI confidence regarding specific outcomes. In practice, they often exhibit heterogeneous cognitive capacities, causing their confidence to deviate, sometimes significantly, from the actual label likelihood. We theoretically demonstrate that existing AI confidence adjustment objectives, such as calibration and human-alignment, are insufficient to ensure fair utility across groups of decision-makers with varying cognitive capacities. Such unfairness may raise concerns about social welfare and may erode human trust in AI systems. To address this issue, we introduce a new concept in AI confidence adjustment: inter-group-alignment. By theoretically bounding the utility disparity between human decision-maker groups as a function of human-alignment level and inter-group-alignment level, we establish an interpretable fairness-aware objective for AI confidence adjustment. Our analysis suggests that achieving utility fairness in AI-assisted decision-making requires both human-alignment and inter-group-alignment. Building on these objectives, we propose a multicalibration-based AI confidence adjustment approach tailored to scenarios involving human decision-makers with heterogeneous cognitive capacities. We further provide theoretical justification showing that our method constitutes a sufficient condition for achieving both human-alignment and inter-group-alignment. We validate our theoretical findings through extensive experiments on four real-world tasks. The results demonstrate that AI confidence adjusted toward both human-alignment and inter-group-alignment significantly improves utility fairness across human decision-maker groups, without sacrificing overall utility. The implementation code is available at https://github.com/WEILaboratory/AI-Ethics-Safety-PaperCode/tree/main/Fair_HAI (ICLR2026).
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Builds on6
- Who Should I Trust: AI or Myself? Leveraging Human and AI Correctness Likelihood to Promote Appropriate Trust in AI-Assisted Decision-MakingShuai Ma, Ying Lei, Xinru Wang, Chengbo Zheng et al.CHI 2023 · 139 citations
- Calibrating Predictions to Decisions: A Novel Approach to Multi-Class CalibrationShengjia Zhao, Michael P. Kim, Roshni Sahoo, Tengyu Ma et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 96 citations
- Uncalibrated Models Can Improve Human-AI CollaborationKailas Vodrahalli, Tobias Gerstenberg, James Y. ZouNeurIPS 2022 · 47 citations
- Human-Aligned Calibration for AI-Assisted Decision MakingNina Corvelo Benz, Manuel Gomez RodriguezNeurIPS 2023 · 45 citations
- Understanding and Mitigating Accuracy Disparity in RegressionJianfeng Chi, Yuan Tian, Geoffrey J. Gordon, Han ZhaoICML 2021 · 29 citations
Related papers
- As Confidence Aligns: Understanding the Effect of AI Confidence on Human Self-confidence in Human-AI Decision MakingJingshu Li, Yitian Yang, Q. Vera Liao, Junti Zhang et al.CHI 2025 · 56 citations
- Too Sure for Our Own Good: A User Study on AI Confidence and Human RelianceCaterina Fregosi, Lucia Vicente, Andrea Campagner, Federico CabitzaAAAI 2026 · 1 citation
- Deciding Fast and Slow: The Role of Cognitive Biases in AI-assisted Decision-makingCharvi Rastogi, Yunfeng Zhang, Dennis Wei, Kush R. Varshney et al.CSCW 2022 · 184 citations
- "Are You Really Sure?" Understanding the Effects of Human Self-Confidence Calibration in AI-Assisted Decision MakingShuai Ma, Xinru Wang, Ying Lei, Chuhan Shi et al.CHI 2024 · 54 citations
- Individual Calibration with Randomized ForecastingShengjia Zhao, Tengyu Ma, Stefano ErmonICML 2020 · 69 citations
