Abstract:Preference-based learning aims to align robot task objectives with human values. One of the most common methods to infer human preferences is by pairwise comparisons of robot task trajectories. Traditional comparison-based preference labeling systems seldom support labelers to digest and identify critical differences between complex trajectories recorded in videos. Our formative study (N = 12) suggests that individuals may overlook non-salient task features and establish biased preference criteria during their preference elicitation process because of partial observations. In addition, they may experience mental fatigue when given many pairs to compare, causing their label quality to deteriorate. To mitigate these issues, we propose FARPLS, a Feature-Augmented Robot trajectory Preference Labeling System. FARPLS highlights potential outliers in a wide variety of task features that matter to humans and extracts the corresponding video keyframes for easy review and comparison. It also dynamically adjusts the labeling order according to users' familiarities, difficulties of the trajectory pair, and level of disagreements. At the same time, the system monitors labelers' consistency and provides feedback on labeling progress to keep labelers engaged. A between-subjects study (N = 42, 105 pairs of robot pick-and-place trajectories per person) shows that FARPLS can help users establish preference criteria more easily and notice more relevant details in the presented trajectories than the conventional interface. FARPLS also improves labeling consistency and engagement, mitigating challenges in preference elicitation without raising cognitive loads significantly
Abstract:In the era of widespread public use of AI systems across various domains, ensuring adversarial robustness has become increasingly vital to maintain safety and prevent undesirable errors. Researchers have curated various adversarial datasets (through perturbations) for capturing model deficiencies that cannot be revealed in standard benchmark datasets. However, little is known about how these adversarial examples differ from the original data points, and there is still no methodology to measure the intended and unintended consequences of those adversarial transformations. In this research, we conducted a systematic survey of existing quantifiable metrics that describe text instances in NLP tasks, among dimensions of difficulty, diversity, and disagreement. We selected several current adversarial effect datasets and compared the distributions between the original and their adversarial counterparts. The results provide valuable insights into what makes these datasets more challenging from a metrics perspective and whether they align with underlying assumptions.