让AI当解说伙伴,帮人真正理解决策理由。
Leveraging Generative AI for Human Understanding: Meta-Requirements and Design Principles for Explanatory AI as a new Paradigm
- 用生成式AI构建动态叙事解释,贴合人类认知逻辑
- 提出5大维度差异,区分传统XAI与新范式
- 适合医疗等需专业判断的场景,助决策者懂原理
人工智能系统在关键领域日益支持决策,但现有可解释AI(XAI)侧重算法透明度,而非人类理解。当前方法虽利于模型审计,却无法满足从业者对领域知识、上下文推理和专业框架整合的需求。本文提出‘解释性AI’新范式,利用生成与多模态能力,使AI成为人类理解的协作伙伴。不同于传统XAI回答‘算法如何决策’以供验证,解释性AI聚焦‘为何这有道理’以支持实际决策。结合认知科学、传播学与教育学理论,以及医疗场景实证与专家访谈,我们识别出五维核心差异:解释目的(诊断到意义建构)、沟通方式(静态技术到动态叙事)、认知立场(算法对应到情境合理)、适应性(统一设计到个性适配)、认知设计(信息过载到认知对齐)。据此提炼五项元需求与十条设计原则。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Artificial intelligence (AI) systems increasingly support decision-making across critical domains, yet current explainable AI (XAI) approaches prioritize algorithmic transparency over human comprehension. While XAI methods reveal computational processes for model validation and audit, end users require explanations integrating domain knowledge, contextual reasoning, and professional frameworks. This disconnect reveals a fundamental design challenge: existing AI explanation approaches fail to address how practitioners actually need to understand and act upon recommendations. This paper introduces Explanatory AI as a complementary paradigm where AI systems leverage generative and multimodal capabilities to serve as explanatory partners for human understanding. Unlike traditional XAI that answers "How did the algorithm decide?" for validation purposes, Explanatory AI addresses "Why does this make sense?" for practitioners making informed decisions. Through theory-informed design, we synthesize multidisciplinary perspectives on explanation from cognitive science, communication research, and education with empirical evidence from healthcare contexts and AI expert interviews. Our analysis identifies five dimensions distinguishing Explanatory AI from traditional XAI: explanatory purpose (from diagnostic to interpretive sense-making), communication mode (from static technical to dynamic narrative interaction), epistemic stance (from algorithmic correspondence to contextual plausibility), adaptivity (from uniform design to personalized accessibility), and cognitive design (from information overload to cognitively aligned delivery). We derive five meta-requirements specifying what systems must achieve and formulate ten design principles prescribing how to build them.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。