首页> 外文期刊>JMLR: Workshop and Conference Proceedings >Interventions over Predictions: Reframing the Ethical Debate for Actuarial Risk Assessment
【24h】

Interventions over Predictions: Reframing the Ethical Debate for Actuarial Risk Assessment

机译:关于预测的干预:重新抑制精算风险评估的道德辩论

获取原文
           

摘要

Actuarial risk assessments are frequently touted as a neutral way to counteract implicit bias and increase the fairness of decisions made at almost every juncture of the criminal justice system, from pretrial release to sentencing, parole and probation. In recent times these assessments have come under increased scrutiny, as critics claim that the statistical techniques underlying them might reproduce existing patterns of discrimination and historical biases that are reflected in the data. Much of this debate is centered around competing notions of fairness and predictive accuracy, which seek to problematize the use of variables that act as “proxies” for protected classes, such as race and gender. However, these debates fail to address the core ethical issue at hand - that current risk assessments are ill-equipped to support ethical punishment and rehabilitation practices in the criminal justice system, because they offer only a limited insight into the underlying drivers of criminal behavior. In this paper, we examine the prevailing paradigms of fairness currently under debate and propose an alternative methodology for identifying the underlying social and structural factors that drive criminal behavior. We argue that the core ethical debate surrounding the use of regression in risk assessments is not one of bias or accuracy. Rather, it’s one of purpose. If machine learning is operationalized merely in the service of predicting future crime, then it becomes difficult to break cycles of criminalization that are driven by the iatrogenic effects of the criminal justice system itself. We posit that machine learning should not be used for prediction, rather it should be used to surface covariates that are fed into a causal model for understanding the social, structural and psychological drivers of crime. We propose an alternative application of machine learning and causal inference away from predicting risk scores to risk mitigation.
机译:精算风险评估经常被吹捧为抵消隐含偏见的中性方式,并从审前,从刑事司法系统到刑事司法系统的几乎每一个关年度提高决定的公平性。最近,由于批评者声称它们的统计技巧可能再现数据的统计技术和历史偏见,因此这些评估受到审查。这些辩论的大部分是以公平和预测准确性的竞争概念为中心的,该概念寻求解决了使用作为“代理”的变量来解决受保护的课程,例如种族和性别。但是,这些辩论未能解决核心道德问题 - 目前的风险评估是刑事司法系统的伦理惩罚和康复实践,因为它们只能对犯罪行为的潜在司机提供有限的洞察力。在本文中,我们审查了目前辩论的公平性范例,并提出了一种替代方法,用于确定推动犯罪行为的潜在社会和结构因素。我们认为,在风险评估中使用回归的核心道德辩论不是偏见或准确性之一。相反,这是一个目的之一。如果机器学习仅仅是在预测未来犯罪的服务中运行,那么它变得难以破坏被刑事司法系统本身的认真影响所驱动的刑期定罪。我们不应用于预测的机器学习,相反,它应该用来将加入犯罪的因果模型的协调因素,以了解犯罪的社会,结构和心理驱动因素。我们提出了一种替代应用机器学习和因果推动远离预测风险评分以危险缓解。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号