Pith. sign in

REVIEW

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 2010.05084 v2 pith:ZBW4VIBQ submitted 2020-10-10 cs.CY

Reflexive Design for Fairness and Other Human Values in Formal Models

classification cs.CY
keywords formalmodelshumanvaluesincorporatingdivergentfairnessother
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Algorithms and other formal models purportedly incorporating human values like fairness have grown increasingly popular in computer science. In response to sociotechnical challenges in the use of these models, designers and researchers have taken widely divergent positions on how formal models incorporating aspects of human values should be used: encouraging their use, moving away from them, or ignoring the normative consequences altogether. In this paper, we seek to resolve these divergent positions by identifying the main conceptual limits of formal modeling, and develop four reflexive values--value fidelity, appropriate accuracy, value legibility, and value contestation--vital for incorporating human values adequately into formal models. We then provide a brief methodology for reflexively designing formal models incorporating human values.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.