Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

Complementarity in Human-AI Collaboration: Concept, Sources, and Evidence

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2404.00029 v2 pith:Z242WYEW submitted 2024-03-21 cs.HC cs.AI

classification cs.HCcs.AI
keywords complementaritycollaborationhuman-aiperformancepotentialsourcesconceptdecision-making
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to significantly enhance human performance across various domains. Ideally, collaboration between humans and AI should result in complementary team performance (CTP) -- a level of performance that neither of them can attain individually. So far, however, CTP has rarely been observed, suggesting an insufficient understanding of the principle and the application of complementarity. Therefore, we develop a general concept of complementarity and formalize its theoretical potential as well as the actual realized effect in decision-making situations. Moreover, we identify information and capability asymmetry as the two key sources of complementarity. Finally, we illustrate the impact of each source on complementarity potential and effect in two empirical studies. Our work provides researchers with a comprehensive theoretical foundation of human-AI complementarity in decision-making and demonstrates that leveraging these sources constitutes a viable pathway towards designing effective human-AI collaboration, i.e., the realization of CTP.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Plan-Then-Execute: An Empirical Study of User Trust and Team Performance When Using LLM Agents As A Daily Assistant

    cs.HC 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    User involvement in plan-then-execute LLM agents fails to calibrate trust and only inconsistently improves performance, while plausible but wrong plans can mislead users into over-trust.

  2. An Empirical Examination of the Evaluative AI Framework

    cs.HC 2024-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A pre-registered experiment found that an AI providing only pro and con evidence, without recommendations, did not improve decision performance and was used shallowly by participants.

  3. Compact groups of galaxies in the TNG100 simulation

    astro-ph.GA 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Using the TNG100 simulation, compact groups of galaxies are shown to be the low-size tail of the normal galaxy group population, not a distinct class.

  4. DeCoDe: Defer-and-Complement Decision-Making via Decoupled Concept Bottleneck Models

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    DeCoDe combines concept bottleneck models with learning to defer to select per-instance among AI-only, human-only, and AI+human strategies, reporting accuracy gains over binary deferral baselines on three image datasets.

  5. Language Games as the Pathway to Artificial Superhuman Intelligence

    cs.AI 2025-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A position paper arguing that open-ended language games with fluid roles, varied rewards, and evolving rules can drive expanded data reproduction and thus a path to artificial superhuman intelligence.

Pith tools