2-Step Agent: How a Bayesian Decision Maker Learns from AI-Decision Support

arXiv:2602.21889 · cs.AI, cs.LG · Submitted 2026-02-25 · Read on arXiv

cs.AI, cs.LG

Submitted: 2026-02-25

Updated: 2026-10-21

Comments: Accepted at NeurIPS 2026. Camera-ready version. 39 pages, 8 figures

License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

The gist: Prognostic predictions from ML models support human decision making in several fields, including high-stakes ones such as healthcare and the judiciary.

Terminology

Abstract

Prognostic predictions from ML models support human decision making in several fields, including high-stakes ones such as healthcare and the judiciary. Yet, we still lack a clear understanding of how decision makers learn from ML-based decision support (ML-DS). In this paper, we introduce a general computational framework, the 2-Step Agent, to capture how a prediction from an ML model can also be used as a source of useful information about the training data and the causal mechanism that generated it. Our framework models (i) how a prediction from an ML model affects the beliefs of a rational Bayesian agent, and (ii) how this change in beliefs affects the estimation of the causal effect, the downstream decision for a new observation, and the subsequent outcome. In addition to the framework itself, we make three contributions. First, for the multivariate linear-Gaussian setting, we derive a tractable solution for the Bayesian inference problem introduced, i.e. one in which the agent infers information about a population from an ML prediction. Second, we experimentally identify conditions under which ML-DS is beneficial compared to unassisted decision making. Third, we show that a single misaligned prior belief of the user can be sufficient for ML-DS to lead to worse downstream outcomes compared to no decision support even when the prognostic model is well-specified and the agent is perfectly rational. Hence, even under ideal conditions, ML-DS can do more harm than good.

Related papers