REVIEW 2 cited by
Responses to Critiques on Machine Learning of Criminality Perceptions (Addendum of arXiv:1611.04135)
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
read the original abstract
In November 2016 we submitted to arXiv our paper "Automated Inference on Criminality Using Face Images". It generated a great deal of discussions in the Internet and some media outlets. Our work is only intended for pure academic discussions; how it has become a media consumption is a total surprise to us. Although in agreement with our critics on the need and importance of policing AI research for the general good of the society, we are deeply baffled by the ways some of them mispresented our work, in particular the motive and objective of our research.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Reliability, Faithfulness, and the Limits of Post-hoc Explanations of Opaque Scientific Models
Reliability and faithfulness of post-hoc explanations do not suffice to support claims about how a scientific phenomenon is structured.
-
The Return of Pseudosciences in Artificial Intelligence: Have Machine Learning and Deep Learning Forgotten Lessons from Statistics and History?
Machine learning and deep learning applications can repeat the errors of physiognomy and Lombrosianism because they treat correlations as causal, and bias reduction alone does not fix this.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.