arXiv:2608.10434cs.AI2026-08

用对话式AI提升无人机入侵检测可解释性,但可能增加操作员过度依赖风险。

Conversational versus Dashboard Explainable AI for UAV Intrusion Detection: An Empirical Study of Operator Trust and Reliance

论文配图:Conversational versus Dashboard Explainable AI for UAV Intrusion Detection: An Empirical Study of Operator Trust and Reliance
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 用大语言模型构建对话式可解释AI,支持按需查询入侵证据。
  • 对话界面让操作员更易获取信息,但自我判断力下降。
  • 适合关注人机协作安全的无人机系统设计者参考。

基于机器学习的入侵检测系统(IDS)在保护无人机(UAV)网络方面表现优异。然而,这些模型的‘黑箱’特性与多模态物理-网络数据的高维度,带来了显著的可解释性挑战。静态可视化仪表盘难以以操作员易懂的方式呈现多模态特征间的复杂关系。为此,我们提出一种由大语言模型(LLM)驱动的对话式可解释AI(XAI)界面,支持按需调查。在受控实验中,我们系统评估了该对话界面与传统XAI仪表盘在后事件审计任务中对操作员理解、信任和依赖的影响。结果表明,对话界面被评价为更具实用性,可能因其帮助参与者更轻松地获取和整合相关信息。但伴随而来的是较低的适当自我依赖水平,暗示存在过度依赖风险。一种可能解释是:自然语言回复使AI建议更易接受,从而降低了操作员在IDS错误时验证底层证据的意愿。研究揭示了无人机入侵审计中人机协作的潜在权衡:提升可用性的交互方式可能增加不恰当依赖的风险。最后讨论了未来XAI系统的设计启示,强调在流畅交互与认知强制机制间寻求平衡。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Machine learning-based Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) have demonstrated superior performance in securing Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) networks. However, the 'black-box' nature of these models, combined with the high dimensionality of multimodal cyber-physical data, poses significant interpretability challenges. Static visualization dashboards may struggle to present complex relationships among multimodal cyber-physical features in a form that is easy for operators to inspect and interpret. To address this, we propose a Conversational XAI interface powered by Large Language Models (LLM) to facilitate on-demand investigation. In a controlled experiment with participants, we systematically evaluated the impact of this conversational interface versus a traditional XAI Dashboard on operator understanding, trust, and reliance during post-incident auditing tasks. Our results suggest that the conversational interface was perceived as more useful than the dashboard, potentially because it helped participants access and synthesize relevant information more easily. However, this benefit was accompanied by a lower level of appropriate self-reliance, indicating a potential risk of over-reliance. One possible interpretation is that the natural-language responses made the AI advice easier to accept, which may have reduced participants' tendency to verify the underlying evidence when the IDS was incorrect. These findings point to a potential trade-off in human-AI collaboration for UAV intrusion auditing: interaction mechanisms that improve perceived usability may also increase the risk of inappropriate reliance. We conclude by discussing design implications for future XAI systems that balance seamless interaction with cognitive forcing functions to foster appropriate reliance.

可解释AI无人机人机交互大模型

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。