Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42719514›Full record

ArticleACM transactions on computer-human interaction : a publication of the Association for Computing Machinery2026

Offline Reinforcement Learning for Adaptive Support in AI-Assisted Decision-Making.

Zana Buçinca, Siddharth Swaroop, Amanda E Paluch, Susan A Murphy, Krzysztof Z Gajos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACM transactions on computer-human interaction : a publication of the Association for Computing Machinery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Zana BuçincaMassachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Siddharth SwaroopUniversity College London, London, UK.
Amanda E PaluchUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Susan A MurphyHarvard University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Krzysztof Z GajosHarvard University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

Pilot and Mentoring CoreP50DA054039 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Inbal Billie Nahum-Shani · 2021 to 2026
$18.2M
NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA054039
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AI decision-support tools typically offer a fixed type of assistance, like AI recommendations and explanations, regardless of the specific decision, individual, or broader context. This fixed design has been shown to hinder both human-AI decision accuracy and human skill improvement in the task. We posit that AI assistance needs to be dynamic, changing in response to contextual factors (e.g., AI uncertainty, task difficulty), individual differences, and specified objectives (e.g., decision accuracy, skill improvement). To enable such adaptive support, we propose reinforcement learning (RL) as a general approach for modeling human-AI decision-making to optimize human-AI interaction for diverse objectives. RL enables optimizing various objectives in AI-assisted decision-making by tailoring and adaptively providing decision support to humans - the right type of assistance, to the right person, at the right time. We instantiated our approach with two objectives: human-AI accuracy on the decision-making task and human skill improvement (i.e., learning about the task) and learned decision support policies from previous human-AI interaction data. We compared the optimized policies against several baselines in AI-assisted decision-making. Across two experiments (N = 316 and N = 964), our results consistently demonstrated that people interacting with policies optimized for accuracy achieve significantly higher accuracy - and even human-AI complementarity - compared to those interacting with any other type of AI support. Our results further indicated that human learning was more difficult to optimize than accuracy. While the policies learned the best available actions to optimize learning, participants who interacted with learning-optimized policies showed significant learning improvement only at times. Our research (1) demonstrates offline RL to be a promising approach to model the dynamics of human-AI decision-making, leading to policies that may optimize various objectives and provide novel insights about the AI-assisted decision-making space, and (2) emphasizes the importance of considering skill improvement and other human-centric objectives beyond accuracy in AI-assisted decision-making, opening up the novel research challenge of optimizing human-AI interaction for such objectives.

Indexed as

AI-assisted decision-makingdecision support systemsexplainable AIhuman-AI interactionhuman-centered AIhuman-centric objectivesoverreliance

Identifiers

PMID42719514
PMCPMC13557772

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.