Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,234 studies31 sourcesUpdated just now
PreprintarXiv licencearXiv

Human-AI-Powered Hypothesis Testing: Cost-Aware Selective AI Scoring and Sequential Human Escalation

Abstract

Large language models are increasingly used as inexpensive judges to evaluate outputs, label data, and assess whether a system meets a desired quality standard. Yet using AI judgments for formal statistical inference is fundamentally different from simply treating them as ground-truth labels: AI evaluations can be biased or noisy, and rigorous hypothesis testing requires explicit control of type-I and type-II errors. We study how to use AI judgments, together with selective human verification, to conduct a valid hypothesis test at minimum cost. We consider a population of items with hidden binary labels. After choosing a fixed pool of items, the decision maker can selectively query AI, send an item directly to a human, escalate an AI-scored item to a human after observing the AI report, or stop once sufficient evidence has accumulated. We derive an information-theoretic lower bound that captures the minimum cost of achieving prescribed testing errors and characterizes the value of AI information and human verification through a report-dependent information frontier. Motivated by this characterization, we develop SCALE, a sequential cost-aware policy that combines selective AI scoring with adaptive human escalation. SCALE is valid at finite sample sizes and matches the lower bound to first order as the target error probabilities vanish. We further extend the framework to an unknown AI-output model using paired AI-human pilot data. Numerically, SCALE approaches Human-only or AI-only testing when one source clearly dominates, while achieving its largest savings when inexpensive AI judgments and selective human verification are both valuable.

Related

  1. Condensed PIPG Sequential Convex Optimization for Reusable-Rocket Powered Landing with Strong Aerodynamics
    Wenbo Li, Linwei Li, Ziqi Xu +1
    arXivPreprintarXiv licenceFull textOptimisation & controlarXiv
  2. A Model of Multiple Hypothesis Testing
    Davide Viviano, Kaspar Wüthrich, Paul Niehaus
    The Review of Economic StudiesPeer-reviewedLicence not statedFull text32 citedStatisticsOpenAlex
  3. Principal-Agent Hypothesis Testing
    Stephen Bates, Michael I. Jordan, Michael Sklar +1
    Journal of the American Statistical AssociationPeer-reviewedLicence not statedFull text37 citedStatisticsOpenAlex
  4. PDE-Based Bounds on Optimal Exponents in Active Simple Hypothesis Testing
    Sushant Vijayan, Himadri Mandal
    arXivPreprintCC BY-NC-SA 4.0Full textStatisticsarXiv
  5. Binary Quantum Hypothesis Testing with a Rejection Option: The Exact Error-Exponent Trade-off
    Yonglong Li
    arXivPreprintCC BY-NC-ND 4.0Full textMathematical physicsQuantum physics & quantum informationarXiv
BibTeX
@misc{ham2026humanaipowered,
  title = {{Human-AI-Powered Hypothesis Testing: Cost-Aware Selective AI Scoring and Sequential Human Escalation}},
  author = {Dae Woong Ham and Xuejun Zhao and Stefanus Jasin and Fenghua Yang},
  howpublished = {arXiv},
  year = {2026},
  month = sep,
  doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2609.28859},
  eprint = {2609.28859},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.28859},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - Human-AI-Powered Hypothesis Testing: Cost-Aware Selective AI Scoring and Sequential Human Escalation
AU  - Dae Woong Ham
AU  - Xuejun Zhao
AU  - Stefanus Jasin
AU  - Fenghua Yang
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/09/24
PB  - arXiv
DO  - 10.48550/arxiv.2609.28859
UR  - https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.28859
AB  - Large language models are increasingly used as inexpensive judges to evaluate outputs, label data, and assess whether a system meets a desired quality standard. Yet using AI judgments for formal statistical inference is fundamentally different from simply treating them as ground-truth labels: AI evaluations can be biased or noisy, and rigorous hypothesis testing requires explicit control of type-I and type-II errors. We study how to use AI judgments, together with selective human verification, to conduct a valid hypothesis test at minimum cost. We consider a population of items with hidden binary labels. After choosing a fixed pool of items, the decision maker can selectively query AI, send an item directly to a human, escalate an AI-scored item to a human after observing the AI report, or stop once sufficient evidence has accumulated. We derive an information-theoretic lower bound that captures the minimum cost of achieving prescribed testing errors and characterizes the value of AI information and human verification through a report-dependent information frontier. Motivated by this characterization, we develop SCALE, a sequential cost-aware policy that combines selective AI scoring with adaptive human escalation. SCALE is valid at finite sample sizes and matches the lower bound to first order as the target error probabilities vanish. We further extend the framework to an unknown AI-output model using paired AI-human pilot data. Numerically, SCALE approaches Human-only or AI-only testing when one source clearly dominates, while achieving its largest savings when inexpensive AI judgments and selective human verification are both valuable.
ER  -