Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Shakespurious t1_j1uv3bj wrote

Reply to comment by MissMormie in NYC's AI bias law is delayed until April 2023, but when it comes into effect, NYC will be the first jurisdiction mandating an AI bias order in the world, revolutionizing the use of AI tools in recruiting by Background-Net-4715

Yeah, the program was told to not select for men, so it used substitute markers, language not used by women on their resumes. And we know that the very top performers in math and physics are overwhelmingly men, so the program tried to select for men, but with extra steps.

1

MissMormie t1_j1v0otv wrote

That's not what happened though. The program was fed resumes of people that aplied in the years previously. Which was a very biased sample to begin with. We do not know for which outcome they trained this model, but it's not unlikely they trained that on people hired. So you can add bias of recruiters on top of the biased sample. This has nothing to do with actual performance.

You're just adding bias on bias which results in missing the better candidate. Even if the better candidate is often male, you don't want to miss out on those amazing woman.

3

Shakespurious t1_j1v54qx wrote

Just for perspective, though, over 99% of Nobel Prize winners in Physics are men.

1

MissMormie t1_j1vjasa wrote

Yes. So? Amazon isn't recruiting nobel prize winning physicists.

It also ignores the question if there has been any bias in getting more men in positions where they can win a nobel prize. In general, if you are a man you are more likely to be told to pursue physics. You are less likely to feel like an outsider in your class and so continue in that career. You are more likely to get picked as a teachers assistant. You are more likely to get picked for a phd spot. You are more likely to get grants. You are more likely to get a job at the right universities where you can actually do the science. You are more likely to be mentored on your professional skills then in how to improve your softskills. You are less likely to be 'promoted' out of the field. You are more likely to be hired as professor who guides phd students, hence getting your name on a lot more work. There's a thousands points where bias can and does play a role. No wonder nobel prize winners are mostly men. There's hardly any woman left in the field at that point.

Also, this bias was even worse in the past and most nobel prizes are handed out based on relatively old research. 2022's nobel prize in physics was awarded for research done in the 1990's. Looking at the birthdates of the nobel prize winners there's hardly any that were born after 1950, even those who won recently. Women in 1950 definitely did not have the same options as men to get into physics.

And even IF 99% of nobel prize winners in physics would still be men if the playing field is completely level. Then still do you not want an algorithm that's biased because it will make you miss that 1% woman that you do want to hire.

4