CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 43Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsCategorization, perception, and languageArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Classification in the Wild: The Science and Art of Transparent Decision Making

Open access
Katsikopoulos, Konstantinos V., Şimşek, Özgür, Buckmann, Marcus, Gigerenzer, Gerd·2021·The MIT Press eBooks
DOI 10.7551/mitpress/11790.001.0001
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Rules for building formal models that use fast-and-frugal heuristics, extending the psychological study of classification to the real world of uncertainty. This book focuses on classification—allocating objects into categories—“in the wild,” in real-world situations and far from the certainty of the lab. In the wild, unlike in typical psychological experiments, the future is not knowable and uncertainty cannot be meaningfully reduced to probability. Connecting the science of heuristics with machine learning, the book shows how to create formal models using classification rules that are simple, fast, and transparent and that can be as accurate as mathematically sophisticated algorithms developed for machine learning. The authors—whose individual expertise ranges from empirical psychology to mathematical modeling to artificial intelligence and data science—offer real-world examples, including voting, HIV screening, and magistrate decision making; present an accessible guide to inducing the models statistically; compare the performance of such models to machine learning algorithms when applied to problems that include predicting diabetes or bank failure; and discuss conceptual and historical connections to cognitive psychology. Finally, they analyze such challenging safety-related applications as decreasing civilian casualties in checkpoints and regulating investment banks.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7551/mitpress/11790.001.0001

Cites

165 of 165 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

9 of the 174 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. [4]4. Almeida, Tiago A., José M. G. Hidalgo, and Akebo Yamakami. "Contributions to the Study of SMS Spam Filtering: New Collection and Results." Proceedings of the 11th ACM Symposium on Document Engineering (2011): 259-262.
  2. [12]12. Bagwell, Randall. "The Threat Assessment Process." Army Lawyer. Department of the Army pamphlet 27-50-419 (2008), 5-16.
  3. [15]15. Blank, Laurie R., and Amos N. Guiora. "Updating the Commander's Toolbox: New Tools for Operationalizing the Law of Armed Conflict." Prism 1, no. 3 (2010): 59-78.
  4. [17]17. Breiman, Leo, Jerome Friedman, Charles J. Stone, and Richard A. Olshen. Classifica- tion and Regression Trees. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 1984.
  5. [20]20. Peter M. Todd, Gerd Gigerenzer, and the ABC Research Group, 216-240. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012.
  6. [21]21. Bruner, Jerome S., Jacqueline J. Goodnow, and George A. Austin. A Study of Thinking. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1956.
  7. [30]30. Cook, Louis. "The World Trade Center Attack: The Paramedic Response; An Insider's View." Critical Care 5, no. 6 (2001): 301-303.
  8. [44]44. Doyle, Nora M., Judy E. Levinson, and Michael O. Gardner. "Rapid versus Enzyme- Linked Immunosorbent Assay Screening in a Low-Risk Mexican American Pop- ulation Presenting in Labor: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis." American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 193, no. 5 (2005): 1280-1285.
  9. [64]64. Kenneth R. Hammond and Tom R. Stewart, 445-452. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
  10. [73]73. Gigerenzer, Gerd, Peter M. Todd, and the ABC Research Group. Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
  11. [82]82. Hammond, D. "The Effects of Remand." Prison Service Journal, no. 69 (1988): 19.
  12. [89]89. Hunter, David A. "The Conservation and Demography of the Southern Corroboree Frog." MA thesis, University of Canberra, 2000.
  13. [95]95. Katsikopoulos, Konstantinos V. "How to Model It: Review of 'Cognitive Modeling.'" Journal of Mathematical Psychology 55, no. 2 (2011): 198-201.
  14. [103]103. Klein, Gary A. Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1998.
  15. [110]110. Larson, Christina. "China's AI Imperative: The Country's Massive Investments in Artificial Intelligence Are Disrupting the Industry-and Strengthening Control of the Populace." Science 359, no. 6376 (2018): 628-630.
  16. [121]121. Marcus, Gary, and Ernest Davis. "How to Build Artificial Intelligence We Can Trust." New York Times International Edition, September 11, 2019. Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/books/monograph/5001/bookpreview-pdf/2254703 by guest on 11 September 2024
  17. [127]127. Moyer, Virginia A. "Screening for HIV: US Preventive Services Task Force Recom- mendation Statement." Annals of Internal Medicine 159, no. 1 (2013): 51-60.
  18. [135]135. Pisters, Ron, Deirdre A. Lane, Robby Nieuwlaat, Cees B. De Vos, Harry J. G. M. Crijns, and Gregory YH Lip. "A Novel User-Friendly Score (HAS-BLED) to Assess 1-Year Risk of Major Bleeding in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: The Euro Heart Survey." Chest 138, no. 5 (2010): 1093-1100.
  19. [138]138. Pozen, Michael W., Ralph B. D'Agostino, Harry P. Selker, Pamela A. Sytkowski, and William B. Hood Jr. "A Predictive Instrument to Improve Coronary-Care-Unit Admission Practices in Acute Ischemic Heart Disease: A Prospective Multicenter Clinical Trial." New England Journal of Medicine 310, no. 20 (1984): 1273-1278.
  20. [143]143. R. V. Kai and H. W. Reese, 161-193. San Diego: Academic Press, 2002.
  21. [149]149. Rubinstein, Reuven. "The Cross-Entropy Method for Combinatorial and Continu- ous Optimization." Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability 1, no. 2 (1999): 127-190. Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/books/monograph/5001/bookpreview-pdf/2254703 by guest on 11 September 2024
  22. [162]162. Sinha, Pawan, Benjamin J. Balas, Yuri Ostrovsky, and Richard Russell. Face Recogni- tion: Models and Mechanism. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press, 2003.
  23. [178]178. United Nations Assistance Mission to Afghanistan. Human Rights' Group Annual Report on the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict. Kabul, Afghanistan, 2012. Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/books/monograph/5001/bookpreview-pdf/2254703 by guest on 11 September 2024 Bibliography
  24. [185]185. Zhao, Sihai Dave, Giovanni Parmigiani, Curtis Huttenhower, and Levi Waldron. "Más-o-Menos: A Simple Sign Averaging Method for Discrimination in Genomic Data Analysis." Bioinformatics 30, no. 21 (2014): 3062-3069.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Katsikopoulos, K. V., Şimşek, Ö., Buckmann, M., & Gigerenzer, G.
ORCID
Venue
The MIT Press eBooks
Publisher
The MIT Press
Published
2021-02-02
DOI
10.7551/mitpress/11790.001.0001
OpenAlex
W4205702555
Cited by
42
References
174
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
8.29
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
Locations
The MIT Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
fast and frugal heuristics, classification, decision making under uncertainty, classification rules, machine learning comparison, voting, HIV screening, diabetes prediction, bank failure prediction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review