Dennis Müller

Dennis Müller, Michael März, Stephan Scheele et al.

Machine learning based image classification algorithms, such as deep neural network approaches, will be increasingly employed in critical settings such as quality control in industry, where transparency and comprehensibility of decisions are crucial. Therefore, we aim to extend the defect detection task towards an interactive human-in-the-loop approach that allows us to integrate rich background knowledge and the inference of complex relationships going beyond traditional purely data-driven approaches. We propose an approach for an interactive support system for classifications in an industrial quality control setting that combines the advantages of both (explainable) knowledge-driven and data-driven machine learning methods, in particular inductive logic programming and convolutional neural networks, with human expertise and control. The resulting system can assist domain experts with decisions, provide transparent explanations for results, and integrate feedback from users; thus reducing workload for humans while both respecting their expertise and without removing their agency or accountability.

Maurice Chiodo, Dennis Müller, Paul Siewert et al.

We use the notion of oracle machines and reductions from computability theory to formalise different Human-in-the-loop (HITL) setups for AI systems, distinguishing between trivial human monitoring (i.e., total functions), single endpoint human action (i.e., many-one reductions), and highly involved human-AI interaction (i.e., Turing reductions). We then proceed to show that the legal status and safety of different setups vary greatly. We present a taxonomy to categorise HITL failure modes, highlighting the practical limitations of HITL setups. We then identify omissions in UK and EU legal frameworks, which focus on HITL setups that may not always achieve the desired ethical, legal, and sociotechnical outcomes. We suggest areas where the law should recognise the effectiveness of different HITL setups and assign responsibility in these contexts, avoiding human "scapegoating". Our work shows an unavoidable trade-off between attribution of legal responsibility, and technical explainability. Overall, we show how HITL setups involve many technical design decisions, and can be prone to failures out of the humans' control. Our formalisation and taxonomy opens up a new analytic perspective on the challenges in creating HITL setups, helping inform AI developers and lawmakers on designing HITL setups to better achieve their desired outcomes.