人工智能和整体评论:在大学招生中告知人类阅读

AJ Alvero, Noah Arthurs, A. Antonio, B. Domingue, Ben Gebre-Medhin, Sonia Giebel, M. Stevens
{"title":"人工智能和整体评论:在大学招生中告知人类阅读","authors":"AJ Alvero, Noah Arthurs, A. Antonio, B. Domingue, Ben Gebre-Medhin, Sonia Giebel, M. Stevens","doi":"10.1145/3375627.3375871","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"College admissions in the United States is carried out by a human-centered method of evaluation known as holistic review, which typically involves reading original narrative essays submitted by each applicant. The legitimacy and fairness of holistic review, which gives human readers significant discretion over determining each applicant's fitness for admission, has been repeatedly challenged in courtrooms and the public sphere. Using a unique corpus of 283,676 application essays submitted to a large, selective, state university system between 2015 and 2016, we assess the extent to which applicant demographic characteristics can be inferred from application essays. We find a relatively interpretable classifier (logistic regression) was able to predict gender and household income with high levels of accuracy. Findings suggest that data auditing might be useful in informing holistic review, and perhaps other evaluative systems, by checking potential bias in human or computational readings.","PeriodicalId":93612,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"AI and Holistic Review: Informing Human Reading in College Admissions\",\"authors\":\"AJ Alvero, Noah Arthurs, A. Antonio, B. Domingue, Ben Gebre-Medhin, Sonia Giebel, M. Stevens\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3375627.3375871\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"College admissions in the United States is carried out by a human-centered method of evaluation known as holistic review, which typically involves reading original narrative essays submitted by each applicant. The legitimacy and fairness of holistic review, which gives human readers significant discretion over determining each applicant's fitness for admission, has been repeatedly challenged in courtrooms and the public sphere. Using a unique corpus of 283,676 application essays submitted to a large, selective, state university system between 2015 and 2016, we assess the extent to which applicant demographic characteristics can be inferred from application essays. We find a relatively interpretable classifier (logistic regression) was able to predict gender and household income with high levels of accuracy. Findings suggest that data auditing might be useful in informing holistic review, and perhaps other evaluative systems, by checking potential bias in human or computational readings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93612,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3375627.3375871\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3375627.3375871","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

美国的大学录取是通过一种以人为本的评估方法进行的,这种方法被称为整体审查,通常包括阅读每个申请人提交的原创叙述文章。整体审查的合法性和公正性在法庭和公共领域不断受到挑战,它赋予人类读者很大的自由裁量权来决定每个申请人是否适合入学。使用2015年至2016年间提交给大型,选择性的州立大学系统的283,676份申请论文的独特语料库,我们评估了从申请论文中推断申请人人口特征的程度。我们发现一个相对可解释的分类器(逻辑回归)能够以较高的准确性预测性别和家庭收入。研究结果表明,通过检查人类或计算读数中的潜在偏差,数据审计可能有助于为整体审查提供信息,也许还有助于其他评估系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
AI and Holistic Review: Informing Human Reading in College Admissions
College admissions in the United States is carried out by a human-centered method of evaluation known as holistic review, which typically involves reading original narrative essays submitted by each applicant. The legitimacy and fairness of holistic review, which gives human readers significant discretion over determining each applicant's fitness for admission, has been repeatedly challenged in courtrooms and the public sphere. Using a unique corpus of 283,676 application essays submitted to a large, selective, state university system between 2015 and 2016, we assess the extent to which applicant demographic characteristics can be inferred from application essays. We find a relatively interpretable classifier (logistic regression) was able to predict gender and household income with high levels of accuracy. Findings suggest that data auditing might be useful in informing holistic review, and perhaps other evaluative systems, by checking potential bias in human or computational readings.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信