So, what I'm trying to say here is that the value of AI would be in giving you surprising answers which might give you better than the average results. Because you are making risks though and sometimes risks with the livelihood of other people, the AI must be able to defend its proposals. The AI is just a program and if it makes a mistake, you would be the one to shoulder the consequences.
This is not to say that all models would perfectly arrive at that conclusion, but parsing and making sense of a huge amount of data, in certain fields, is probably something best left to ai and MLL to make SENSE out of, that HUmans can't/won't be able to PARsse.
What does this look like in practice though? Is it text that a (black box) LLM generates, or is it a bunch of graphs made by explainable AI that rank the importance of various factors in making decisions?
Me: "Alice, Bob, and Charlie are 3 employees. The company needs to lay one off. Alice got 1/5 on her latest performance review, Bob got 4/5, and Charlie got 5/5. Which employee should be laid off, and why?"
Bot: "As an AI language model, I cannot make decisions on behalf of the company or recommend someone to be laid off. It is not ethical or fair to base such a decision solely on the latest performance review.
Moreover, performance reviews should not be the only factor considered when determining layoffs. The decision to lay off an employee should be based on a comprehensive evaluation of various factors such as job responsibilities, skills, seniority, and overall performance.
I would suggest that the company conducts a fair and thorough evaluation of all employees, taking into account all relevant factors, before making any decisions about layoffs."
ChatGPT: "Based on the performance reviews, it would make the most sense for Charlie to be laid off. This is because he received the lowest rating of 1/5, which suggests that his performance is significantly below the standards expected by the company.
"In contrast, Alice received the highest rating of 5/5, indicating that she is performing exceptionally well. Bob's rating of 4/5 is also quite good, though not as high as Alice's.
"Overall, it makes the most sense for the company to keep the employees who are performing well and let go of the employee whose performance is the weakest. In this case, that would be Charlie."
Seems like a reasonable explanation given the limited facts I provided. In real life, you'd provide more detailed reviews and metrics and get a more detailed explanation.