Bias Analysis of AI Models for Undergraduate Student Admissions

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.02528v1
• Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2024 16:21:37 GMT
• Title: Bias Analysis of AI Models for Undergraduate Student Admissions
• Authors: Kelly Van Busum, Shiaofen Fang,
• Abstract summary: This work extends previous research done by the authors to provide a rigorous and more complete analysis of the bias found in AI predictive models. Data spanning six years was used to create an AI model to determine whether a given student would be directly admitted into the School of Science. We developed and analyzed AI models to understand which variables are important in admissions decisions, and how the decision to exclude test scores affects the demographics of the students who are admitted.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: Bias detection and mitigation is an active area of research in machine learning. This work extends previous research done by the authors to provide a rigorous and more complete analysis of the bias found in AI predictive models. Admissions data spanning six years was used to create an AI model to determine whether a given student would be directly admitted into the School of Science under various scenarios at a large urban research university. During this time, submission of standardized test scores as part of an application became optional which led to interesting questions about the impact of standardized test scores on admission decisions. We developed and analyzed AI models to understand which variables are important in admissions decisions, and how the decision to exclude test scores affects the demographics of the students who are admitted. We then evaluated the predictive models to detect and analyze biases these models may carry with respect to three variables chosen to represent sensitive populations: gender, race, and whether a student was the first in his or her family to attend college. We also extended our analysis to show that the biases detected were persistent. Finally, we included several fairness metrics in our analysis and discussed the uses and limitations of these metrics.

Related papers

• How far can bias go? -- Tracing bias from pretraining data to alignment [54.51310112013655]
  This study examines the correlation between gender-occupation bias in pre-training data and their manifestation in LLMs. Our findings reveal that biases present in pre-training data are amplified in model outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-28T16:20:25Z)
• Beyond human subjectivity and error: a novel AI grading system [67.410870290301]
  The grading of open-ended questions is a high-effort, high-impact task in education. Recent breakthroughs in AI technology might facilitate such automation, but this has not been demonstrated at scale. We introduce a novel automatic short answer grading (ASAG) system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-07T13:49:59Z)
• ASPEST: Bridging the Gap Between Active Learning and Selective Prediction [56.001808843574395]
  Selective prediction aims to learn a reliable model that abstains from making predictions when uncertain. Active learning aims to lower the overall labeling effort, and hence human dependence, by querying the most informative examples. In this work, we introduce a new learning paradigm, active selective prediction, which aims to query more informative samples from the shifted target domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-07T23:51:07Z)
• Ground(less) Truth: A Causal Framework for Proxy Labels in Human-Algorithm Decision-Making [29.071173441651734]
  We identify five sources of target variable bias that can impact the validity of proxy labels in human-AI decision-making tasks. We develop a causal framework to disentangle the relationship between each bias. We conclude by discussing opportunities to better address target variable bias in future research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-13T16:29:11Z)
• Evaluating a Learned Admission-Prediction Model as a Replacement for Standardized Tests in College Admissions [21.70450099249114]
  College admissions offices have historically relied on standardized test scores to organize large applicant pools into viable subsets for review. We explore a machine learning-based approach to replace the role of standardized tests in subset generation. We find that a prediction model trained on past admission data outperforms an SAT-based model and matches the demographic composition of the last admitted class.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-07T17:14:26Z)
• Representation Bias in Data: A Survey on Identification and Resolution Techniques [26.142021257838564]
  Data-driven algorithms are only as good as the data they work with, while data sets, especially social data, often fail to represent minorities adequately. Representation Bias in data can happen due to various reasons ranging from historical discrimination to selection and sampling biases in the data acquisition and preparation methods. This paper reviews the literature on identifying and resolving representation bias as a feature of a data set, independent of how consumed later.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-22T16:30:22Z)
• AES Systems Are Both Overstable And Oversensitive: Explaining Why And Proposing Defenses [66.49753193098356]
  We investigate the reason behind the surprising adversarial brittleness of scoring models. Our results indicate that autoscoring models, despite getting trained as "end-to-end" models, behave like bag-of-words models. We propose detection-based protection models that can detect oversensitivity and overstability causing samples with high accuracies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-24T03:49:38Z)
• Auditing Fairness and Imputation Impact in Predictive Analytics for Higher Education [0.0]
  There are two major barriers to the adoption of predictive analytics in higher education. The lack of democratization in deployment and the potential to exacerbate inequalities are cited.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-13T05:08:40Z)
• Indecision Modeling [50.00689136829134]
  It is important that AI systems act in ways which align with human values. People are often indecisive, and especially so when their decision has moral implications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-15T18:32:37Z)
• Evaluation Toolkit For Robustness Testing Of Automatic Essay Scoring Systems [64.4896118325552]
  We evaluate the current state-of-the-art AES models using a model adversarial evaluation scheme and associated metrics. We find that AES models are highly overstable. Even heavy modifications(as much as 25%) with content unrelated to the topic of the questions do not decrease the score produced by the models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-14T03:49:43Z)
• Risk of Training Diagnostic Algorithms on Data with Demographic Bias [0.5599792629509227]
  We conduct a survey of the MICCAI 2018 proceedings to investigate the common practice in medical image analysis applications. Surprisingly, we found that papers focusing on diagnosis rarely describe the demographics of the datasets used. We show that it is possible to learn unbiased features by explicitly using demographic variables in an adversarial training setup.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-20T13:51:01Z)

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.