Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2301.12569

A Mental Model Based Framework of Trust

Abstract

Handling trust is a core requirement of effective interaction between people and AI agents. Thus, any decision-making framework designed to work with people must be able to estimate human trust. In this paper, we propose a mental model-based framework of trust that captures multidimensional aspects of trust and can be used to infer human trust. This framework can also be used as a foundation for any trust-aware decision-making framework. Through our mental model-based framework of trust, we propose a formal framework that captures intuitions about trust present in extant literature. We show how our framework captures various dimensions of trust perception and then use the framework to define trust evolution, human reliance, and decision-making. Additionally, we also propose a formalization of the appropriate level of trust in the agent. Using human subject studies, we evaluate if (1) changes in trust can be achieved by adjusting human beliefs about the agent according to predictions made by our mental model framework and (2) adjustments in human belief lead to corresponding modifications in trust perceptions; performance, process, and purpose, by controlling different aspects of the model.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Zahra Zahedi, Sarath Sreedharan, Erin Chiou, Subbarao Kambhampati. 2026-08-28. A Mental Model Based Framework of Trust. https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.12569

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Reducing Catastrophic Risk from AI with Systematic Monitoring and Evaluation of Rogue AI Progression

This article presents a structured framework of behavioral indicators that may signal progression toward potentially catastrophic threats from artificial intelligence systems. We adopt a pragmatic approach, inspired by established methodologies in cybersecurity and national security. By establishing clear metrics, indicators, and thresholds across multiple dimensions of AI capability and behavior, this framework enables researchers and policymakers to implement evidence-based monitoring protocols.

cs.CY

Impact of AI Search Summaries on Website Traffic: Evidence from Google AI Overviews and Wikipedia

Search engines increasingly display AI-generated answers above organic links, potentially displacing traffic to upstream publishers. We estimate the impact of Google's AI Overviews (AIO) on Wikipedia's search traffic using AIO's staggered geographic rollout and Wikipedia's multilingual structure. Our difference-in-differences design compares monthly external-search referrals to English Wikipedia articles with referrals to the same articles in German and French, and finds that default AIO availability reduced English search traffic by 5.45% and 4.82%, respectively. Our results suggest that answer-producing digital intermediaries can materially reallocate attention away from informational publishers, with implications for content monetization, search platform design, and policy.

cs.CY

The End of AI Exponentiation: Fluttering Inside and Outside AI Bubble

The exponentiation of Artificial intelligence (AI) in the recent past has entered a transformative era that has been driven by the growth in large language models (LLMs), large-scale compute infrastructures, and autonomous reasoning systems. However, the rapid acceleration of AI has increasingly shown technological, societal, economic, ethical and infrastructural challenges associated with peak data limitations, rising computational demands, synthetic data recursion, valuation inflation, and societal instability. The traditional scaling paradigms that have powered the modern AI systems are gradually encountering friction in sustaining continuous exponential growth. This paper views ``the end of AI exponentiation,'' thus exploring how it flutters inside and outside the bubble, where instability emerges within the AI ecosystem through compute and data-center races, speculative investments, and the rat-race toward superintelligence, and outside the ecosystem through labor disruption, governance concerns, public uncertainty, and geopolitical acceleration surrounding future intelligent systems and infrastructures globally.

cs.AI