Scholarlink

<p>Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly seen as potentially replacing humans in decision-making and problem-solving across many&#xa0;domains. AI is effective for many well-specified decisions. But we argue that AI cannot deal with what we call “actor-specificity.” Actor-specific decisions and problems are (a) forward-looking, (b) individual and idiosyncratic, (c) reasoning-intensive, and (d) experimental—requiring intervention in the world to facilitate “counter-to-data” reasoning. These four criteria, captured by the “FIRE” acronym, function as exclusion criteria: they identify when decisions should not be delegated to AI. These criteria are unified by an overarching concept we call “actor-specificity”: the recognition that such decisions cannot be separated from the particular agent—their beliefs, goals, and theories. The “actor” in actor-specificity refers to the focal decision maker, highlighting the need for a <i>first-person point of view in decision-making</i>—an approach that cannot be modeled from the third-person, population-level perspective that is the basis of AI. As such, the FIRE criteria offer an epistemic and normative basis for determining which decisions should remain with human actors, distinct from the current and future technical capabilities of AI.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

AI and actor-specific decisions

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月8日

查看全文
  • Teppo Felin,
  • Mari Sako,
  • Jessica Hullman

摘要

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly seen as potentially replacing humans in decision-making and problem-solving across many domains. AI is effective for many well-specified decisions. But we argue that AI cannot deal with what we call “actor-specificity.” Actor-specific decisions and problems are (a) forward-looking, (b) individual and idiosyncratic, (c) reasoning-intensive, and (d) experimental—requiring intervention in the world to facilitate “counter-to-data” reasoning. These four criteria, captured by the “FIRE” acronym, function as exclusion criteria: they identify when decisions should not be delegated to AI. These criteria are unified by an overarching concept we call “actor-specificity”: the recognition that such decisions cannot be separated from the particular agent—their beliefs, goals, and theories. The “actor” in actor-specificity refers to the focal decision maker, highlighting the need for a first-person point of view in decision-making—an approach that cannot be modeled from the third-person, population-level perspective that is the basis of AI. As such, the FIRE criteria offer an epistemic and normative basis for determining which decisions should remain with human actors, distinct from the current and future technical capabilities of AI.