Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Lionel Page
dblp:163/5085
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0002-6020-9733ORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper |
Human-AI interaction · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Trustworthy machine learning · 50% Multi-agent systems · 50% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | AI Oversight and Human Mistakes: Evidence from Centre Court · EC 2024 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems › human-agent interaction
human-AI decision making |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | AI Oversight and Human Mistakes: Evidence from Centre Court · EC 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
field study · 1.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | AI Oversight and Human Mistakes: Evidence from Centre CourtabstractPowered by the increasing predictive capabilities of machine learning algorithms, artificial intelligence (AI) systems have acquired the ability to improve outcomes by overruling human mistakes. However, to assess the full impact of adding AI oversight, we must understand whether its presence alters human decision-making. While a large amount of research has focused on how humans respond when being assisted by AI, very little is known about how humans respond when their decisions might be overruled by AI. Because being overruled can carry psychological costs (e.g., shame and embarrassment of being overruled) and psychological benefits (e.g., relief at having their mistakes fixed), individuals might alter their decision-making under AI oversight. We provide the first field evidence that AI oversight carries psychological costs that can impact human decision-making. David Almog, Romain Gauriot, Lionel Page |
EC | 3 |