Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Efficient candidate screening under multiple tests and implications for fairness

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 1905.11361 v1 pith:NIALMFGW submitted 2019-05-27 cs.LG cs.CYstat.ML

classification cs.LGcs.CYstat.ML
keywords testswhenemployerpolicysameskilladdressadminister
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

When recruiting job candidates, employers rarely observe their underlying skill level directly. Instead, they must administer a series of interviews and/or collate other noisy signals in order to estimate the worker's skill. Traditional economics papers address screening models where employers access worker skill via a single noisy signal. In this paper, we extend this theoretical analysis to a multi-test setting, considering both Bernoulli and Gaussian models. We analyze the optimal employer policy both when the employer sets a fixed number of tests per candidate and when the employer can set a dynamic policy, assigning further tests adaptively based on results from the previous tests. To start, we characterize the optimal policy when employees constitute a single group, demonstrating some interesting trade-offs. Subsequently, we address the multi-group setting, demonstrating that when the noise levels vary across groups, a fundamental impossibility emerges whereby we cannot administer the same number of tests, subject candidates to the same decision rule, and yet realize the same outcomes in both groups.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Analyzing Fairness of Computer Vision and Natural Language Processing Models

    cs.LG 2024-12 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    Chaining fairness mitigation algorithms across ML lifecycle stages sometimes reduces bias more than single-stage application, but the evidence here is under-specified and partly circular.

  2. A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learning

    cs.LG 2019-08 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    This survey catalogs types of bias, fairness definitions, and mitigation strategies across ML domains.

  3. Analyzing Fairness of Classification Machine Learning Model with Structured Dataset

    cs.LG 2024-12 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    On the Adult income dataset, fairness libraries Fairlearn, AIF360, and What-If Tool all reduce measured gender disparity in a credit-style classifier, but the paper's comparison across libraries is not controlled.

Pith tools