Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Assessing the Fairness of AI Systems: AI Practitioners' Processes, Challenges, and Needs for Support

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2112.05675 v2 pith:SUSX2GG4 submitted 2021-12-10 cs.AI cs.CYcs.HC

classification cs.AIcs.CYcs.HC
keywords practitionerssystemschallengesdisaggregatedevaluationsfairnessgapsgroups
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Various tools and practices have been developed to support practitioners in identifying, assessing, and mitigating fairness-related harms caused by AI systems. However, prior research has highlighted gaps between the intended design of these tools and practices and their use within particular contexts, including gaps caused by the role that organizational factors play in shaping fairness work. In this paper, we investigate these gaps for one such practice: disaggregated evaluations of AI systems, intended to uncover performance disparities between demographic groups. By conducting semi-structured interviews and structured workshops with thirty-three AI practitioners from ten teams at three technology companies, we identify practitioners' processes, challenges, and needs for support when designing disaggregated evaluations. We find that practitioners face challenges when choosing performance metrics, identifying the most relevant direct stakeholders and demographic groups on which to focus, and collecting datasets with which to conduct disaggregated evaluations. More generally, we identify impacts on fairness work stemming from a lack of engagement with direct stakeholders or domain experts, business imperatives that prioritize customers over marginalized groups, and the drive to deploy AI systems at scale.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Towards Creating Infrastructures for Values and Ethics Work in the Production of Software Technologies

    cs.HC 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Ethical technology needs redesigned organizational processes, standards, policies, and communities, not just ethics tools for individual workers.

Pith tools