Keeping it "organized and logical"

Abstract

Explainable AI (XAI) is growing in importance as AI pervades modern society, but few have studied how XAI can directly support people trying to assess an AI agent. Without a rigorous process, people may approach assessment in ad hoc ways---leading to the possibility of wide variations in assessment of the same agent due only to variations in their processes. AAR, or After-Action Review, is a method some military organizations use to assess human agents, and it has been validated in many domains. Drawing upon this strategy, we derived an AAR for AI, to organize ways people assess reinforcement learning (RL) agents in a sequential decision-making environment. The results of our qualitative study revealed several strengths and weaknesses of the AAR/AI process and the explanations embedded within it.