Act, Confirm, or Stop? Smarter behavior for AI assistants, wearables & robots — Amit Desai, Roku

English
AAI Engineer
컴퓨터/소프트웨어가전제품/카메라

스크립트

00:00:00.
00:00:12Hi, everyone.
00:00:13How's it going?
00:00:15Hey, Patricia, how are you?
00:00:17So last presentation of the day, so let's make it count.
00:00:23All right.
00:00:24Let me start with a little bit of background on myself.
00:00:28And my background, I'm a voice subject matter expert.
00:00:34I've been working in voice AI for a long time
00:00:37across different surfaces, devices, and both at Alexa,
00:00:44at Roku, at my own startups, in the App Store.
00:00:48And my perspective is a little different
00:00:52from a lot of other voice AI practitioners.
00:00:56I think it's a combination of a deep voice user interface
00:01:03expertise and intuition mixed in with new technical approaches
00:01:09that I think can produce really magical experiences.
00:01:12So I think it's both sides.
00:01:13And I think that's especially true in this new area that we're in,
00:01:17with frontier tech, where the human interface is basically
00:01:21being redefined.
00:01:22So let me start with, I'll just blast through the first couple
00:01:27of slides, then get to the premise.
00:01:29I think everybody knows that voice has incredible potential.
00:01:32There's the power of voice.
00:01:34I think across everywhere, it's the most natural interface.
00:01:37Humans love talking.
00:01:39And the problem is, the other half is the pain of voice.
00:01:43So it's the power and the pain.
00:01:45Voice is error prone.
00:01:46And I think those errors are going to continue for a while.
00:01:52And I think the cost or consequence of those errors
00:01:56is going to grow, especially as we go from informational AI
00:02:00bots to embodied AI, where rather than just giving answers
00:02:04that might be erroneous, we're going to have AI systems take
00:02:09physical actions or digital actions where, you know,
00:02:13if the robot throws your watch out with the trash,
00:02:17it's a lot worse than playing the wrong song.
00:02:19So I do think that a new approach is definitely needed.
00:02:25And here's the TLDR of the premise
00:02:27we're going to walk through today.
00:02:29There are two ways to improve customer or user satisfaction
00:02:34of a voice AI assistant.
00:02:37And that is by increasing accuracy, which people know about.
00:02:40I mean, technically, accuracy.
00:02:43And the other is a different knob that we have
00:02:46that we are not using adequately.
00:02:48And I'll call that a system decision, which we will define,
00:02:53which is orthogonal, which is different from accuracy.
00:02:57And I believe this approach, which I have used
00:03:01in several different environments and seen some success,
00:03:05I think is a promising area that we should consider developing.
00:03:10Let me walk through this with a simple, smart speaker example.
00:03:16And we'll go step by step with this approach.
00:03:19But it is a scalable approach that I think
00:03:22can apply across different surfaces and devices.
00:03:25So let's get started.
00:03:27So suppose we all are making a smart speaker, coincidentally,
00:03:32called Alexa.
00:03:34And Alexa is very simple.
00:03:37It just allows you to ask for music, and it'll play a song.
00:03:41And of course, it will play either the song you wanted
00:03:45or a different song.
00:03:46So it'll either be right or it'll be wrong.
00:03:48This isn't that different from what you've seen out there.
00:03:53Now, let's first talk about accuracy.
00:03:55Accuracy, let's say we define it as we take 1,000 spoken requests.
00:04:00We observe the input and the output.
00:04:02We label it.
00:04:03And we look at this.
00:04:05This is the map of 1,000 points.
00:04:07And 79% of the time, 790 dots here,
00:04:12were actually the correct song.
00:04:13So this is, let's say, human annotated, 21% wrong song.
00:04:19So that's the accuracy.
00:04:21Now, like I said, knob 1 is to spend a lot of time
00:04:25working on improving the accuracy percentage
00:04:30point by percentage point at any layer in the stack.
00:04:33If it's a cascaded system, there's perhaps a wake word layer,
00:04:38and a speech ASR layer, and an NLU layer, which
00:04:41might have intent classification, entity extraction,
00:04:45a lot of different layers, VAD, et cetera.
00:04:46And any of those can contribute to errors.
00:04:48So we spent time.
00:04:50We might be able to reduce that 210 to a smaller number.
00:04:53That is, I think, a known area that we're tackling.
00:04:57But I think knob 2, which is what I was talking about,
00:05:01is what we'll go through here, which
00:05:02is keeping the accuracy exactly the same, so 79%.
00:05:07What could we do in conditions of uncertainty
00:05:11to improve user satisfaction?
00:05:13And I think we can do a lot.
00:05:15So let's start first with the original system is just acting.
00:05:19Like I said, user says something, system plays a song.
00:05:21It's either the right song or the wrong song.
00:05:24Immediately, I think just common sense
00:05:26tells us that we could introduce at least one system
00:05:29behavior to stop, or rather to reject the hypothesis
00:05:32and do nothing.
00:05:33So there is now one more option to decide.
00:05:37The system may decide and say, sorry, I didn't get that,
00:05:40or sorry, could you repeat that?
00:05:42The challenge, of course, is how, when
00:05:46do we decide to stop?
00:05:48And I mean quantitatively.
00:05:51Here's one approach to kind of visualizing this.
00:05:54Because if we don't, we'll just take probably
00:05:56some swag, like some guesstimate.
00:05:58And I'll prove that if we just took a guesstimate,
00:06:01we would end up with a worse situation
00:06:03than a more rigorous approach.
00:06:04So let's just assume I took those 1,000 data points.
00:06:08And like I said, they've been annotated.
00:06:10And we assign a confidence score, a single confidence score,
00:06:14to the hypothesis that was generated by the system,
00:06:18between 0 and 1.
00:06:19And let's say it's reasonably calibrated.
00:06:20This is a simplification.
00:06:22If it's a cascaded system, there are multiple layers
00:06:24and multiple confidence scores.
00:06:26But let's just assume that for now.
00:06:27Whoops.
00:06:28So we're going to have 790 points that are correct, 210 wrong.
00:06:33Each one has a confidence score.
00:06:35And we're going to plot it, plot the distributions.
00:06:39On the x-axis, I've just converted from 0 to 1 to percentages.
00:06:43And the question is, how do we choose a threshold T,
00:06:48such that whatever that percentage is, to the left of it,
00:06:52meaning if when the system forms a hypothesis,
00:06:57if the confidence score C is less than that T,
00:07:00stop and say sorry.
00:07:02Otherwise, play.
00:07:03The question is, how do we choose a T?
00:07:05So far, everything I'm saying is fairly commonsensical.
00:07:08But this is where intuition will fail us.
00:07:12We might say something like, OK, I don't know.
00:07:14Let's do 65%.
00:07:16It seems, you know, gut feeling like, OK, it's kind of confident.
00:07:19That's probably when we should speak.
00:07:22Now, here's where we start coming out with some sophistication.
00:07:26Any T we choose is producing bad outcomes.
00:07:30Bad in two fields.
00:07:32One is, obviously, on the left side,
00:07:35any time you stop, it's bad.
00:07:37The user doesn't want it to stop.
00:07:39They want to hear their song.
00:07:41The other bad is, if you do play a wrong song,
00:07:45of course that's bad as well.
00:07:47So these are two kinds of bad outcomes.
00:07:50But here is the important part.
00:07:52Now I've elaborated on the tree diagram.
00:07:56On the right-hand side, the bad outcomes are not equally bad.
00:08:01They're not the same thing from a user perspective.
00:08:03And obviously, let's think about it.
00:08:06If the wrong song plays, you said, play Kiss.
00:08:10And it starts playing Kiss Kiss by Chris Brown instead of the one
00:08:15by Prince, that's going to be the highest user cost.
00:08:20Let me define user cost from the user's perspective.
00:08:23First, I have to hear music and realize that is not Prince.
00:08:27Then I have to shout over my Alexa and get it to stop.
00:08:32And then I have to re-request.
00:08:33All of that is a lot of effort.
00:08:35That is definitely a worse outcome than the system stopping and saying,
00:08:40sorry, I didn't understand that.
00:08:42However, we should go further and try
00:08:44to quantify that relative badness.
00:08:47And there are many ways to do it.
00:08:48And I think this is an area to be explored.
00:08:50For now, let's just consider this a heuristic of if that outcome
00:08:55happens, how many more seconds, additional seconds,
00:08:58will it take for the user to get back to success,
00:09:01which is to play the song they wanted, Kiss by Prince.
00:09:04And I just put down some numbers here.
00:09:07Let's say, in the case of a bad song, it's 10 seconds
00:09:10if you add up all the things I got to do.
00:09:11And if it's a I didn't understand you,
00:09:14it's four seconds, because that's how long it would take you
00:09:16to re-speak and the extra latency.
00:09:19And now, here's where we can start utilizing that.
00:09:23If we go back to our distribution curve,
00:09:26and we're trying to find out where is T,
00:09:29now we have basically turned this into a problem
00:09:33of minimizing a cost function.
00:09:34It's a user cost function.
00:09:36It is the number of bad acts, whatever the T causes,
00:09:39times 10, because that was a unit cost we gave,
00:09:42plus the number of stops times four,
00:09:44because that's the unit cost we gave.
00:09:48By the way, one thing I should have elaborated,
00:09:51because I work in voice, and we like language,
00:09:53and we like puns, so this whole thing
00:09:55is called an outcome user cost heuristic.
00:09:59So that spells the word ouch, and that
00:10:01is some expression of pain.
00:10:03Yes, we are language nerds, so these kinds of things amuse us.
00:10:08And so now let's consider that the cost function is to minimize the ouch.
00:10:12And now that let's see if I'm going to bring up a tool.
00:10:17Let's see if this works.
00:10:19Where I have actually gotten, or with one of my coding assistants,
00:10:24gotten an interactive graph where we have actually plotted those thousand points.
00:10:32And as we vary the threshold T, you can see that the total user cost here,
00:10:41which is that function of x times y plus a times b, actually changes.
00:10:46So let's, in the very beginning when we said the system was just playing,
00:10:51the cost across those thousand points was 2,100,
00:10:56or divided by a thousand is 2.1 ouch points per turn.
00:11:01Then we said, OK, let's insert a stop behavior,
00:11:04and let's like wing it and say 65%.
00:11:07That's when I want the threshold.
00:11:09If we brought this up to 65, yeah, that's better.
00:11:12Now it's 1904, or 1.9 per turn.
00:11:16But it's not optimal.
00:11:17As it turns out, if we do actually ask for AI to solve the problem across this curve,
00:11:25it turns out 43%, so I'll drag it now to 43%,
00:11:30is in fact the optimal point of T.
00:11:38This minimizes the cost function.
00:11:40You can see it's the lowest point on this graph down here to 1.27.
00:11:45So effectively, we haven't changed the accuracy at all.
00:11:49The system is not any smarter in that sense.
00:11:51But with some clever system behavior, conversational behavior is what we'd call it,
00:11:56and some optimization, and a cost function called ouch.
00:12:00We have, from the user's perspective, produced a more satisfactory assistant.
00:12:06And this is not a trivial accomplishment.
00:12:09Okay, now let me go back to this.
00:12:11Let me see if I can get this.
00:12:14Oh, great.
00:12:15Okay.
00:12:16Let's continue this.
00:12:18Let's continue this by now adding one more behavior.
00:12:22Let's call it the confirm behavior.
00:12:23So there was play, obviously then stop, confirm.
00:12:26Confirm is basically the system after you said something, saying kiss, play kiss by Prince,
00:12:33or maybe play kiss kiss by Chris Brown.
00:12:36And, you know, the user can either confirm, like affirm it, or they can correct it.
00:12:41It is a different kind of behavior, and, again, this is kind of how humans behave.
00:12:45That's obviously the inspiration.
00:12:47Now, if we go back to our problem of optimization, we have a third, obviously, option, which is
00:12:56to confirm.
00:12:57So this would translate to two thresholds, two thresholds, which are separating the distribution
00:13:05into three spaces of stop, confirm, and act.
00:13:11And the question is, now, where are these T's?
00:13:14And we have now given up on guesstimating because we know it doesn't work.
00:13:18So we're going to be a lot smarter and go back to the concept of user outcome cost and
00:13:25then, you know, go look for some optimization in that graph.
00:13:29So let's define what are all the possible bad outcomes that T1 and T2 make for.
00:13:37So good, you can see my cursor.
00:13:39So of course, any stops are still bad.
00:13:43Then in the middle are confirmations.
00:13:46Confirmations are bad because they slow the user down.
00:13:49There's a confirmation outcome called confirm yes, where they just affirmed it by saying yeah.
00:13:55Or know where they had to correct it.
00:13:57And going back to our formula, these outcomes are not equally bad.
00:14:03And in fact, nobody will, I think, argue here from a user's perspective.
00:14:08Affirming, just saying yes, is obviously less painful than saying no and then having to restate
00:14:14whatever it is that you wanted in the first place.
00:14:16So now I've assigned values of two or six.
00:14:19And again, I said it was a heuristic.
00:14:21This would be roughly the amount of time it would take for the extra for the user to get
00:14:25to the song they want.
00:14:26Saying listening and then saying yes is like two seconds.
00:14:29And then now we restate the cost function for this added behavior as this number of bad type
00:14:42one times unit cost, bad type plus bad type two times unit cost, et cetera.
00:14:46And now we try to minimize this user cost function and minimize the ouch.
00:14:52Yes, I'm going to keep doing that pun.
00:14:57Let's go back.
00:14:58So this is now the interactive graph.
00:15:01But with the cost values, the unit cost here, 10, 2, 6, 4.
00:15:10And we're just going to ask the AI to tell us.
00:15:14Here's the heat map because it's now two dimensions, saying that the optimal values
00:15:19are 41 for the T1 and 49 for the T2.
00:15:26And if we employed that, then we would go to 1, 4, 6, 4.
00:15:31By the way, whatever numbers I put in here, like let's say I thought wrong act was 20.
00:15:37It's really irritating and painful and takes way longer to actually correct it when you hear
00:15:42a wrong song.
00:15:44That would change all these numbers and the optimal point.
00:15:48So again, it is about what is the relative badness of these outcomes.
00:15:51Also, of course, the distribution curves, naturally.
00:15:55Let's go back here.
00:15:57Okay, so I'm going to speed up a little bit.
00:16:05Let's go back here, presentation mode.
00:16:09Okay, so what have we shown?
00:16:12That if we did the super naive approach, it's 2.1.
00:16:17Act and stop, 1.9, then 1.27, then 1.26.
00:16:22We are able to bring this with every added layer of sophistication, adding more behaviors, being
00:16:27smart about user cost and optimizing.
00:16:32We have made a tremendous difference without changing the accuracy at all.
00:16:37This was a super-simplified example.
00:16:39In real systems, you're not going to have, obviously, some offline decision threshold or two.
00:16:45It's going to be a real-time, you know, learned decision model.
00:16:48But the principle is the same.
00:16:50And I believe this is scalable across all voice AI surfaces.
00:16:55Obviously this is a smart speaker.
00:16:58But if we go across any of these surfaces, you will find the equivalence.
00:17:06We will find the analogies with some differences, but the spirit and the, I think, the gain will
00:17:13be similar.
00:17:14So just, for example, in the TV AI assistant space, if you employ it here, you're going to
00:17:22have the same thing.
00:17:23When users express intents, like on TV, it's, you know, open a channel.
00:17:27That's one of the most common, obviously, requests on a TV voice assistant.
00:17:32Same thing, you're going to find you'll have exactly the same approach.
00:17:36But the difference will be maybe in the assignments of the user outcomes because the UI and the modalities
00:17:44are different.
00:17:45When you have a TV, you have a multimodal interface where choices can be shown.
00:17:50So instead of, you know, asking, did you mean ABC, you know, news live by speech, that you
00:17:58will, the system would display choices and not just one and show ABC News live this, that
00:18:03would be the confirmed step.
00:18:04And if it's visual and you can use your remote control to select something, it's less pain.
00:18:10So you would change some of these values.
00:18:12Or if, in fact, launching the channel would kick you out of your current state, then it
00:18:18would go in the other direction and the cost of, you know, a bad act would go much higher.
00:18:23So it's the same concept, but in this new modalities, variables can change, values can change, arguments
00:18:31can change.
00:18:32But the premise still holds and you can improve from the user's perspective, because we're all
00:18:37about, you know, making humans happy.
00:18:40You can make them happier.
00:18:42And this, as I said in conclusion, can be applied across all surfaces.
00:18:49I did say at the very beginning, just to recap for us, that voice is great when it works, bad
00:18:55when it doesn't.
00:18:57And as we get into embodied AI, where these AI assistants are taking actions, physical or
00:19:03even digital, like making a phone call or sending an email, it is getting more and more difficult
00:19:10just to rely on accuracy to improve user satisfaction.
00:19:14I believe there's a whole knob, the second knob, called smarter conversational behavior under
00:19:19uncertainty.
00:19:22And if we actually exploit that, we can very much help these AI systems reach acceptable
00:19:32user experience.
00:19:34Otherwise, I think this will continue to be a bottleneck.
00:19:37Like a lot of things will get better.
00:19:39But if the voice interface as experienced by a user does not improve, it is going to be
00:19:45a choke point.
00:19:47And if you just remember one word or two words from this whole presentation, it would be to
00:19:56minimize the ouch of the experience.
00:20:00So thank you.
00:20:01I'll stick around for questions if you guys got any.
00:20:04Thanks a lot.
00:20:15Bye.
00:20:16Bye.
00:20:16Bye.

핵심 요약

Optimizing conversational behaviors under uncertainty using an outcome user cost heuristic minimizes user friction and improves voice assistant satisfaction without requiring underlying model accuracy gains.

하이라이트

  • Voice AI error rates persist across layers like wake word, ASR, and NLU, with negative consequences escalating as systems transition to embodied AI.

  • A baseline smart speaker request dataset demonstrates a 79% accuracy rate against a 21% error rate.

  • Introducing a stop behavior and optimizing its threshold via an outcome user cost heuristic decreases user cost from 2.1 to 1.27 points per turn.

  • Adding a confirm behavior with dual thresholds further optimizes system decisions and reduces user cost to 1.26 points per turn.

  • Minimizing the ouch heuristic metric successfully improves user satisfaction without requiring any increase in underlying model accuracy.

타임라인

Voice AI Limitations and the Need for a New Approach

  • Voice interfaces possess inherent error rates that will persist across frontier tech surfaces.
  • Transitioning from informational AI bots to embodied AI increases the physical and digital costs of system errors.
  • Improving user satisfaction relies on two distinct knobs, consisting of technical accuracy and system decisions.

Voice technology combines natural human interaction with persistent error rates across cascaded layers. As systems evolve into embodied agents capable of taking physical or digital actions, errors carry significantly higher consequences than playing incorrect music tracks. Addressing this challenge requires moving beyond traditional accuracy improvements to leverage deliberate system decisions.

Accuracy Baselines and the Stop Behavior

  • Evaluating 1,000 spoken requests reveals a 79% correct song match and a 21% error rate.
  • Introducing a stop behavior allows the system to reject low-confidence hypotheses and avoid incorrect actions.
  • Quantifying relative user badness through a cost function called ouch minimizes total user effort during errors.

A smart speaker music request scenario establishes a baseline accuracy distribution. While guesstimating a confidence threshold like 65% improves performance slightly, rigorous minimization of a user cost function identifies an optimal threshold of 43%. This approach assigns specific unit costs to bad actions and unnecessary stops to calculate the most efficient conversational response.

Integrating Confirm Behavior and Minimizing Ouch

  • Adding a confirm behavior creates three distinct response spaces governed by two confidence thresholds.
  • Affirming a correct guess requires fewer user correction steps than fixing a completely wrong action.
  • Optimizing dual thresholds against assigned unit costs successfully lowers user cost per turn to 1.26.

Expanding system capabilities to include confirmation introduces intermediate states where the assistant verifies requests before acting. Assigning specific time-based penalty values to different user outcomes allows optimization models to generate heat maps indicating optimal threshold pairings. Each added layer of sophistication progressively reduces overall friction.

Cross-Surface Scalability and Conclusion

  • The optimization principles scale across different surfaces including smart TVs and embodied robots.
  • Multimodal interfaces alter outcome cost assignments by leveraging visual display choices and remote inputs.
  • Minimizing the ouch metric serves as a critical mechanism for preventing voice interfaces from becoming user experience bottlenecks.

The behavioral optimization framework applies directly to television assistants and other modalities where visual interfaces alter user effort parameters. Managing uncertainty through strategic conversational behavior provides a scalable path to high user satisfaction. Prioritizing experience optimization prevents voice interfaces from choking adoption as AI systems grow more autonomous.

커뮤니티 글

아직 글이 없습니다. 이 영상에 대한 첫 번째 글을 작성해 보세요!

이 영상에 대해 글쓰기