REVIEW 2 cited by
Explanatory Debiasing: Involving Domain Experts in the Data Generation Process to Mitigate Representation Bias in AI Systems
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
read the original abstract
Representation bias is one of the most common types of biases in artificial intelligence (AI) systems, causing AI models to perform poorly on underrepresented data segments. Although AI practitioners use various methods to reduce representation bias, their effectiveness is often constrained by insufficient domain knowledge in the debiasing process. To address this gap, this paper introduces a set of generic design guidelines for effectively involving domain experts in representation debiasing. We instantiated our proposed guidelines in a healthcare-focused application and evaluated them through a comprehensive mixed-methods user study with 35 healthcare experts. Our findings show that involving domain experts can reduce representation bias without compromising model accuracy. Based on our findings, we also offer recommendations for developers to build robust debiasing systems guided by our generic design guidelines, ensuring more effective inclusion of domain experts in the debiasing process.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Visual-Conversational Interface for Evidence-Based Explanation of Diabetes Risk Prediction
A visual-conversational diabetes risk tool grounded in scientific evidence was rated by 30 healthcare professionals as improving understanding and calibrating trust.
-
Importance of User Control in Data-Centric Steering for Healthcare Experts
Healthcare experts who manually adjusted training data improved a diabetes prediction model more than those using automated corrections, without losing trust or understanding.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.