让AI在下棋时更懂人类弱点,干预效果比顶尖引擎更好
Improving Human Performance with Value-Aware Interventions: A Case Study in Chess
- 根据人类当前决策与最优价值的差距来判断何时该干预
- 模拟和真人实验均显示,低中段玩家胜率提升明显
- 适合想用AI辅助但怕过度干预的训练者或教学场景
AI在协助人类进行序列决策任务时,如何适时干预仍是关键挑战。传统做法是推荐强模型认定的最佳走法,但若人类无法执行后续最优动作,反而会降低整体表现。本文提出价值感知干预机制:基于强化学习中的贝尔曼方程,当人类策略与价值函数不一致时,便存在干预机会。我们构建了一个可在预算内覆盖人类动作的马尔可夫决策过程模型。单次干预下,最优策略是推荐最大化人类价值函数的动作;多干预场景中,按策略-价值偏差大小排序优先级。通过大规模棋局数据学习人类模型,在模拟中本方法持续优于使用最强引擎Stockfish的干预策略。20名玩家参与的真人实验(共600盘)显示,低中水平玩家性能显著提升,高水平玩家表现接近专家级引擎干预效果。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
AI systems are increasingly used to assist humans in sequential decision-making tasks, yet determining when and how an AI assistant should intervene remains a fundamental challenge. A potential baseline is to recommend the optimal action according to a strong model. However, such actions assume optimal follow-up actions, which human decision makers may fail to execute, potentially reducing overall performance. In this work, we propose and study value-aware interventions, motivated by a basic principle in reinforcement learning: under the Bellman equation, the optimal policy selects actions that maximize the immediate reward plus the value function. When a decision maker follows a suboptimal policy, this policy-value consistency no longer holds, creating discrepancies between the actions taken by the policy and those that maximize the immediate reward plus the value of the next state. We show that these policy-value inconsistencies naturally identify opportunities for intervention. We formalize this problem in a Markov decision process where an AI assistant may override human actions under an intervention budget. In the single-intervention regime, we show that the optimal strategy is to recommend the action that maximizes the human value function. For settings with multiple interventions, we propose a tractable approximation that prioritizes interventions based on the magnitude of the policy-value discrepancy. We evaluate these ideas in the domain of chess by learning models of humans from large-scale gameplay data. In simulation, our approach consistently outperforms interventions based on the strongest chess engine (Stockfish) in a wide range of settings. A within-subject human study with 20 players and 600 games further shows that our interventions significantly improve performance for low- and mid-skill players while matching expert-engine interventions for high-skill players.
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。