You could display the confidence or click through to the reasoning. Then the 
user can better understand the quality of the answer.

Sent from my iPad

> On 17 Jun 2017, at 5:08 am, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Perhaps of interest.
> 
> Pine
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Chris Koerner <ckoer...@wikimedia.org>
> Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 8:31 AM
> Subject: [Design] Design in the Era of the Algorithm
> To: des...@lists.wikimedia.org
> 
> 
> Josh Clark on design principles for addressing flaws in machine learning.
> (via waxy.org)\
> 
> "The answer machines have an overconfidence problem. It’s not only a
> data-science problem that the algorithm returns bad conclusions. It’s a
> problem of presentation: the interface suggests that there’s one true
> answer, offering it up with a confidence that is unjustified.
> 
> So this is a design problem, too. The presentation fails to set appropriate
> expectations or context, and instead presents a bad answer with
> matter-of-fact assurance. As we learn to present machine-originated
> content, we face a very hard question: how might we add some productive
> humility to these interfaces to temper their overconfidence?
> 
> I have ideas."
> 
> https://bigmedium.com/speaking/design-in-the-era-of-the-algorithm.html
> 
> Yours,
> Chris Koerner
> Community Liaison - Discovery
> Wikimedia Foundation
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Design mailing list
> des...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Reply via email to