The findings suggest that the exclusion of sensitive or critical variables may compromise equity between subgroups and retaining all relevant variables could reduce implicit bias, so the interdisciplinary approach could provide deeper insight into the ethical implications and compliance with regulatory standards.
Abstract
Fairness in AI systems has become more important with recent regulatory demands, such as the EU AI Act. Traditional approaches often do not take into account philosophical ethics and social awareness. Variable selection processes, in particular, can introduce implicit bias, affecting equity across different subgroups. We discuss a mathematical approach that evaluates fairness in AI, aligning mathematical methodologies with ethical considerations and regulatory requirements. Our aim is to advocate for interdisciplinary collaboration to address fairness, emphasizing the importance of understanding broader ethical and societal contexts. Our approach emphasizes maintaining all potentially relevant variables to allow for more granular fairness assessments and to reduce implicit bias. The findings suggest that the exclusion of sensitive or critical variables may compromise equity between subgroups. In contrast, retaining all relevant variables could reduce implicit bias. Thus, the interdisciplinary approach could provide deeper insight into the ethical implications and compliance with regulatory standards. By integrating a mathematical approach with ethical and social awareness, we suggest more equitable outcomes and responsible AI deployment. This work underscores the necessity of interdisciplinary collaboration in effectively addressing fairness in AI systems aligned with the objectives of the European Union's AI Act, which seeks to promote trustworthy and fair AI systems.
This study explores the potential of counterfactual explanations to assess artificial intelligence (AI) fairness, especially in critical decision-making systems. Predictive models may amplify biases inherent in data sets or algorithms, and given the absence of a universally accepted fairness metric, a case-specific app...
Federico Sabbatini, Roberta Calegari· AI and Ethics· 0 citations
This study introduces a fairness-by-design framework that integrates stakeholder involvement and explainability into the development lifecycle and operationalizes this framework through the Fairness Process Card, a practical tool for documenting procedural justice mechanisms.
A literature review of scholarly works purporting to evaluate the bias or fairness of technological systems used for tasks related to hiring and employment finds that most characterize the severity of bias- or fairness-related consequences but do not follow best practices to characterize the uncertainty around either t...
Kyra Wilson, Sa Kang, Saloni Dash et al.· 0 citations
The increasing adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in recruitment has transformed traditional hiring practices by improving efficiency, reducing recruitment time, and supporting data-driven decision-making. Despite these advantages, concerns regarding fairness, accountability, and transparency in AI-enabled recrui...
Shaima Asharaf Ali, K. Parimalakanthi· International Journal of Cre...· 0 citations
The topic of ‘research fairness’ is receiving growing attention in Research Integrity (RI) initiatives, with increasing acknowledgement of the relationship between RI and fairness concerns such as diversity equity and inclusion (DEI) and responsible collaborations. However, initiatives usually neglect addressing struct...
Clàudia Pallisé Perelló, Crespo López María de los Ángeles, N. Evans et al.· Journal of Academic Ethics· 0 citations