Papers

AutoAnalysis:自动更新的人机协作元分析上线

AutoAnalysis: An automated, self-updating meta-analysis of human-AI collaboration

Why we picked it

arXiv 上一个自动元分析系统,已经汇总了 420 篇人机协作论文,结论挺反直觉:人机搭配打得过人类单干,却打不过 AI 单干。

AutoAnalysis 是一项自动化、可自我更新的元分析系统,用于整合人机协作领域的实证研究。其最新一轮运行综合了 420 篇论文中的 1955 个效应量。结果显示,人机组合平均表现显著优于人类单独工作,但显著逊于人类或 AI 中表现更好的一方。研究强调区分'提升人类表现'与'实现人机协同'两类目标,并建议将协作方案同时与人类基线和 AI 基线作对比评估。随着新研究发表,该系统会自动把新证据纳入分析。

Original · arXiv cs.AI

AutoAnalysis: An automated, self-updating meta-analysis of human-AI collaboration

As generative artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more capable and widely used, understanding when and how humans should work with these systems is becoming increasingly important. However, the empirical evidence in this space offers conflicting recommendations, which leaves individuals and organizations without clear guidance on when to combine human and AI capabilities. Existing meta-analyses can help reconcile these findings, but they require substantial manual effort and cannot readily incorporate new evidence as it emerges. To address this challenge, we introduce AutoAnalysis: an automated, self-updating meta-analysis of when humans and AI work better together, and when they work better alone. AutoAnalysis' most recent run synthesizes 1,955 effect sizes from 420 papers. Across this body of work, we found that, on average, human-AI combinations performed significantly better than humans alone, but they performed significantly worse than the better of humans or AI alone. These findings highlight the important distinction between improving human performance and achieving human-AI synergy and underscore the need to evaluate collaboration against both human and AI performance alone. As new studies emerge, AutoAnalysis will integrate their findings into the meta-analysis, providing cumulative evidence about when humans and AI perform better together and how human-AI performance varies across AI agents, tasks, and processes.