Search and Filter

Repository Feedback

Your feedback helps us improve the repository's content relevance and usability. Please share your thoughts to help us better serve researchers and practitioners.

Submit feedback

Submit a research study

Contribute to the repository:

Add a paper

How trust networks shape students' opinions about the proficiency of artificially intelligent assistants

Authors
Yutong Bu,
Andrew Melatos,
Robin Evans
Date
Publisher
arXiv
The rising use of educational tools controlled by artificial intelligence (AI) has provoked a debate about their proficiency. While intrinsic proficiency, especially in tasks such as grading, has been measured and studied extensively, perceived proficiency remains underexplored. Here it is shown through Monte Carlo multi-agent simulations that trust networks among students influence their perceptions of the proficiency of an AI tool. A probabilistic opinion dynamics model is constructed, in which every student's perceptions are described by a probability density function (PDF), which is updated at every time step through independent, personal observations and peer pressure shaped by trust relationships. It is found that students infer correctly the AI tool's proficiency $\theta_{\rm AI}$ in allies-only networks (i.e.\ high trust networks). AI-avoiders reach asymptotic learning faster than AI-users, and the asymptotic learning time for AI-users decreases as their number increases. However, asymptotic learning is disrupted even by a single partisan, who is stubbornly incorrect in their belief $\theta_{\rm p} \neq \theta_{\rm AI}$, making other students' beliefs vacillate indefinitely between $\theta_{\rm p}$ and $\theta_{\rm AI}$. In opponents-only (low trust) networks, all students reach asymptotic learning, but only a minority infer $\theta_{\rm AI}$ correctly. AI-users have a small advantage over AI-avoiders in reaching the right conclusion. In mixed networks, students may exhibit turbulent nonconvergence and intermittency, or achieve asymptotic learning, depending on the relationships between partisans and AI-users. The educational implications of the results are discussed briefly in the context of designing robust usage policies for AI tools, with an emphasis on the unintended and inequitable consequences which arise sometimes from counterintuitive network effects.
Study at a glance
  • Question: How do trust networks among students shape their opinions about an AI tool's proficiency?
  • Setting and data: Not stated in the abstract
  • Method: Computer simulations of student networks (Monte Carlo multi-agent simulations)
Why it matters

The rising use of educational AI tools has provoked debate about their proficiency. While intrinsic proficiency has been studied extensively, perceived proficiency remains underexplored.

Key findings
  • In simulated student networks, students accurately judge an AI tool's proficiency in high-trust groups, with AI avoiders settling on the truth faster than active users.
  • A single peer with a stubbornly incorrect belief disrupted consensus, causing other students' perceptions of the AI tool to waver indefinitely.
  • In low-trust networks, only a minority of students correctly assess an AI tool's proficiency, though AI users have a small advantage over avoiders.

Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.

Who is the user?
Who age?