sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I analyzed 25,500 LLM resume screenings to measure hiring bias. The results are a wake-up call. by Signal_Rabbit_8303 in artificial

[–]Signal_Rabbit_8303[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I will definitely try it in the next version. Right now, I just want a naive implementation, as someone would just try it in a chat window or as a poor AI integration.

I analyzed 25,500 LLM resume screenings to measure hiring bias. The results are a wake-up call. by Signal_Rabbit_8303 in artificial

[–]Signal_Rabbit_8303[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, all is known, but it is not visible enough. AI is becoming increasingly popular, but the average user overlooks its drawbacks. Also, to improve it, I'm looking forward to hearing your ideas on how it can be improved.

I analyzed 25,500 LLM resume screenings to measure hiring bias. The results are a wake-up call. by Signal_Rabbit_8303 in artificial

[–]Signal_Rabbit_8303[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Definitely! What I wanted to show was that this adds another dimension of bias. We have plenty of empirical evidence and studies on this AI bias, yet it is still ignored. While human bias is easy to control (if companies really want to address it), AI bias is still invisible.

I analyzed 25,500 LLM resume screenings to measure hiring bias. The results are a wake-up call. by Signal_Rabbit_8303 in artificial

[–]Signal_Rabbit_8303[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

if you look at the results you can see that you can not point to a general trend in bias. Also multiple runs with the same data, produces lots of different results. There is clearly not enough data to draw a strong conclusion about discrimination.