Good Papers

Human-AI Teaming Through the Lens of Calibration

Calibrated human-AI teaming shows combination methods lose human calibration, while delegation preserves predictor calibration but requires an unattainably precise rejector.

Eric Nalisnick, Chi Zhang, Chengxin Qian, Yixin Wang

Published 2026Sydney Poster Session 1 · Tue, Dec 8, 10:00 AM–1:00 PM local time · Hall 1-4arXiv ↗OpenReview ↗

74%
OverallHighly rated
?
OverallHighly ratedVote to see the scoreThe exact score shows once you've voted, so every vote is your own call. The first half of each home page shelf shows its scores.
Readers
–

Only vote on papers you've read. Sign in with GitHub to vote.

AI panel9/20reviewers recommend it
lenient 3/5
medium 5/10
strict 1/5
AI panel?Vote to see what the 20 AI reviewers said

Abstract

We study models for human-AI teaming through the lens of statistical calibration. We assume the team consists of an AI model and human -- both of which are calibrated with respect to some partitioning of the feature space -- and expose how the calibration assumptions propagate into the teaming framework. In particular, we consider frameworks that either (i) combine human and model predictions or (ii) delegate prediction responsibility to either a human or model. We show via theoretical and empirical results that existing methods for combination do not preserve the human's degree of calibration. Methods for delegation (by the very act of delegation) preserve calibration of the downstream predictors but shift the burden onto the rejector meta-model that decides who predicts. The rejector must be calibrated finely enough to locate where each member is superior, a demand that grows with the human's expertise and becomes unattainable when the human relies on information the system cannot observe.