Algorithmic Pluralism: A Structural Approach To Equal Opportunity

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.08157v4
• Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 15:27:19 GMT
• Title: Algorithmic Pluralism: A Structural Approach To Equal Opportunity
• Authors: Shomik Jain, Vinith Suriyakumar, Kathleen Creel, Ashia Wilson,
• Abstract summary: We argue that there must be a pluralism of opportunity available to many different individuals in order to promote equal opportunity in a systemic way. We show how this framework has several implications for system design and regulation through current debates about equal opportunity in algorithmic hiring.
• Score: 0.4954041894944345
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: We present a structural approach toward achieving equal opportunity in systems of algorithmic decision-making called algorithmic pluralism. Algorithmic pluralism describes a state of affairs in which no set of algorithms severely limits access to opportunity, allowing individuals the freedom to pursue a diverse range of life paths. To argue for algorithmic pluralism, we adopt Joseph Fishkin's theory of bottlenecks, which focuses on the structure of decision-points that determine how opportunities are allocated. The theory contends that each decision-point or bottleneck limits access to opportunities with some degree of severity and legitimacy. We extend Fishkin's structural viewpoint and use it to reframe existing systemic concerns about equal opportunity in algorithmic decision-making, such as patterned inequality and algorithmic monoculture. In proposing algorithmic pluralism, we argue for the urgent priority of alleviating severe bottlenecks in algorithmic decision-making. We contend that there must be a pluralism of opportunity available to many different individuals in order to promote equal opportunity in a systemic way. We further show how this framework has several implications for system design and regulation through current debates about equal opportunity in algorithmic hiring.

Related papers

• A Unifying Post-Processing Framework for Multi-Objective Learn-to-Defer Problems [6.046591474843391]
  Learn-to-Defer is a paradigm that enables learning algorithms to work not in isolation but as a team with human experts. In this paper, we obtain the Bayes optimal solution for learn-to-defer systems under various constraints. Our algorithm shows improvements in terms of constraint violation over a set of baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-17T16:32:30Z)
• Algorithmic Fairness: A Tolerance Perspective [31.882207568746168]
  This survey delves into the existing literature on algorithmic fairness, specifically highlighting its multifaceted social consequences. We introduce a novel taxonomy based on 'tolerance', a term we define as the degree to which variations in fairness outcomes are acceptable. Our systematic review covers diverse industries, revealing critical insights into the balance between algorithmic decision making and social equity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-26T08:16:54Z)
• Steering Responsible AI: A Case for Algorithmic Pluralism [0.0]
  I suggest examining further the notion of algorithmic pluralism. I argue, algorithmic pluralism has the potential to sustain the diversity, multiplicity, and inclusiveness that are so vital to democracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-20T18:45:04Z)
• A Unified Algorithm Framework for Unsupervised Discovery of Skills based on Determinantal Point Process [53.86223883060367]
  We show that diversity and coverage in unsupervised option discovery can indeed be unified under the same mathematical framework. Our proposed algorithm, ODPP, has undergone extensive evaluation on challenging tasks created with Mujoco and Atari.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-01T01:40:03Z)
• Optimal Algorithms for Decentralized Stochastic Variational Inequalities [113.43047601775453]
  This work concentrates on the decentralized setting, which is increasingly important but not well understood. We present lower bounds for both communication and local iterations and construct optimal algorithms that match these lower bounds. Our algorithms are the best among the available not only in the decentralized case, but also in the deterministic and non-distributed literature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-06T13:14:02Z)
• Algorithm Selection on a Meta Level [58.720142291102135]
  We introduce the problem of meta algorithm selection, which essentially asks for the best way to combine a given set of algorithm selectors. We present a general methodological framework for meta algorithm selection as well as several concrete learning methods as instantiations of this framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-20T11:23:21Z)
• Towards Algorithmic Transparency: A Diversity Perspective [8.138520743045731]
  Research on algorithmic bias has exploded in recent years, highlighting both the problems of bias, and the potential solutions. Transparency is important for facilitating fairness management as well as explainability in algorithms. We reflect on the relationship between diversity and bias, arguing that diversity drives the need for transparency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-12T17:28:12Z)
• Towards Meta-Algorithm Selection [78.13985819417974]
  Instance-specific algorithm selection (AS) deals with the automatic selection of an algorithm from a fixed set of candidates. We show that meta-algorithm-selection can indeed prove beneficial in some cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-17T17:27:33Z)
• Towards a Flexible Framework for Algorithmic Fairness [0.8379286663107844]
  In recent years, many different definitions for ensuring non-discrimination in algorithmic decision systems have been put forward. We present an algorithm that harnesses optimal transport to provide a flexible framework to interpolate between different fairness definitions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-15T16:06:53Z)
• Reinforcement Learning as Iterative and Amortised Inference [62.997667081978825]
  We use the control as inference framework to outline a novel classification scheme based on amortised and iterative inference. We show that taking this perspective allows us to identify parts of the algorithmic design space which have been relatively unexplored.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-13T16:10:03Z)
• Extreme Algorithm Selection With Dyadic Feature Representation [78.13985819417974]
  We propose the setting of extreme algorithm selection (XAS) where we consider fixed sets of thousands of candidate algorithms. We assess the applicability of state-of-the-art AS techniques to the XAS setting and propose approaches leveraging a dyadic feature representation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-29T09:40:58Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.