yego.me
💡 Stop wasting time. Read Youtube instead of watch. Download Chrome Extension

Can AI predict someone's breakup? - Thomas Hofweber


3m read
·Nov 8, 2024

You and your partner Alex have been in a strong, loving relationship for years, and lately you're considering getting engaged. Alex is enthusiastic about the idea, but you can’t get over the statistics. You know a lot of marriages end in divorce, often not amicably.

And over 10% of couples in their first marriage get divorced within the first five years. If your marriage wouldn’t even last five years, you feel like tying the knot would be a mistake. But you live in the near future, where a brand-new company just released an AI-based model that can predict your likelihood of divorce.

The model is trained on data sets containing individuals’ social media activity, online search histories, spending habits, and history of marriage and divorce. And using this information, the AI can predict if a couple will divorce within the first five years of marriage with 95% accuracy. The only catch is the model doesn’t offer any reasons for its results—it simply predicts that you will or won’t divorce without saying why.

So, should you decide whether or not to get married based on this AI’s prediction? Suppose the model predicts you and Alex would divorce within five years of getting married. At this point, you'd have three options. You could get married anyway and hope the prediction is wrong. You could break up now, though there’s no way to know if ending your currently happy relationship would cause more harm than letting the prediction run its course.

Or, you could stay together and remain unmarried, on the off-chance marriage itself would be the problem. Though without understanding the reasons for your predicted divorce, you’d never know if those mystery issues would still emerge to ruin your relationship. The uncertainty undermining all these options stems from a well-known issue with AI around explainability and transparency.

This problem plagues tons of potentially useful predictive models, such as those that could be used to predict which bank customers are most likely to repay a loan, or which prisoners are most likely to reoffend if granted parole. Without knowing why AI systems reach their decisions, many worry we can’t think critically about how to follow their advice. But the transparency problem doesn’t just prevent us from understanding these models, it also impacts the user’s accountability.

For example, if the AI's prediction led you to break up with Alex, what explanation could you reasonably offer them? That you want to end your happy relationship because some mysterious machine predicted its demise? That hardly seems fair to Alex. We don’t always owe people an explanation for our actions, but when we do, AI’s lack of transparency can create ethically challenging situations.

And accountability is just one of the tradeoffs we make by outsourcing important decisions to AI. If you’re comfortable deferring your agency to an AI model it’s likely because you’re focused on the accuracy of the prediction. In this mindset, it doesn’t really matter why you and Alex might break up—simply that you likely will.

But if you prioritize authenticity over accuracy, then you'll need to understand and appreciate the reasons for your future divorce before ending things today. Authentic decision making like this is essential for maintaining accountability, and it might be your best chance to prove the prediction wrong.

On the other hand, it’s also possible the model already accounted for your attempts to defy it, and you’re just setting yourself up for failure. 95% accuracy is high, but it’s not perfect—that figure means 1 in 20 couples will receive a false prediction.

And as more people use this service, the likelihood increases that someone who was predicted to divorce will do so just because the AI predicted they would. If that happens to enough newlyweds, the AI's success rate could be artificially maintained or even increased by these self-fulfilling predictions. Of course, no matter what the AI might tell you, whether you even ask for its prediction is still up to you.

More Articles

View All
Heaven on Earth | The Story of God
NARRATOR: The Hindu god Vishnu is the protector of creation, and Angkor Wat was built for him. Inside the temple are over 12,000 square feet of intricately carved reliefs. One relief was created to link King Suryavarman II to Vishnu himself. Look, you can…
TIL: You Might Be Related to Genghis Khan | Today I Learned
[Music] [Applause] [Music] So you probably heard of the name Genghis Khan or Jengus Khan, but you might not realize that something like one in 200 men in the world were genetically related to Genghis Khan. So he was obviously very, um, prolific. Yeah, bu…
Thinking like a historian | The historian's toolkit | US History | Khan Academy
I think one of the most underrated skills for learning history is learning how to think like a historian. And what do I mean by thinking like a historian? Does that mean that you have to go out and buy a tweed jacket with some elbow patches and maybe grow…
TALKING BACKWARDS (Backwards Banter Brain Testing) - Smarter Every Day 168
Hey, it’s me, Destin. Welcome back to Smarter Every Day. A while back on the Smarter Every Day subreddit, someone made a post that said something like “no one ever believes that I can talk backwards.” This caught my eye, and I watched the video, and it wa…
Help me INTERVIEW THE PRESIDENT - Smarter Every Day 150
[music] Hey, it’s me, Destin. Welcome back to Smarter Every Day. This is different; it’s really a big deal. I have been invited to go to the White House to sit down with the President of the United States of America for 10 to 12 minutes to discuss issues …
How to Manage with Ben Horowitz (How to Start a Startup 2014: Lecture 15)
So in Sam’s originally sent me an email to do this course he said, “Ben, can you teach a 50-minute course on management?” I immediately thought to myself, “Wow, I just wrote a 300-page book on management.” So that book was entirely too long, and I didn’t …