Statistical evidence and algorithmic decision-making

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

Statistical evidence and algorithmic decision-making. / Holm, Sune .

I: Synthese, Bind 202, 28, 2023.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Holm, S 2023, 'Statistical evidence and algorithmic decision-making', Synthese, bind 202, 28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04246-8

APA

Holm, S. (2023). Statistical evidence and algorithmic decision-making. Synthese, 202, [28]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04246-8

Vancouver

Holm S. Statistical evidence and algorithmic decision-making. Synthese. 2023;202. 28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04246-8

Author

Holm, Sune . / Statistical evidence and algorithmic decision-making. I: Synthese. 2023 ; Bind 202.

Bibtex

@article{c907ec092bc84e219a4f47be36518999,
title = "Statistical evidence and algorithmic decision-making",
abstract = "The use of algorithms to support prediction-based decision-making is becoming commonplace in a range of domains including health, criminal justice, education, social services, lending, and hiring. An assumption governing such decisions is that there is a property Y such that individual a should be allocated resource R by decision-maker D if a is Y. When there is uncertainty about whether a is Y, algorithms may provide valuable decision support by accurately predicting whether a is Y on the basis of known features of a. Based on recent work on statistical evidence in epistemology this article presents an argument against relying exclusively on algorithmic predictions to allocate resources when they provide purely statistical evidence that a is Y. The article then responds to the objection that any evidence that will increase the proportion of correct decisions should be accepted as the basis for allocations regardless of its epistemic deficiency. Finally, some important practical aspects of the conclusion are considered.",
author = "Sune Holm",
year = "2023",
doi = "10.1007/s11229-023-04246-8",
language = "English",
volume = "202",
journal = "Synthese",
issn = "0039-7857",
publisher = "Springer",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Statistical evidence and algorithmic decision-making

AU - Holm, Sune

PY - 2023

Y1 - 2023

N2 - The use of algorithms to support prediction-based decision-making is becoming commonplace in a range of domains including health, criminal justice, education, social services, lending, and hiring. An assumption governing such decisions is that there is a property Y such that individual a should be allocated resource R by decision-maker D if a is Y. When there is uncertainty about whether a is Y, algorithms may provide valuable decision support by accurately predicting whether a is Y on the basis of known features of a. Based on recent work on statistical evidence in epistemology this article presents an argument against relying exclusively on algorithmic predictions to allocate resources when they provide purely statistical evidence that a is Y. The article then responds to the objection that any evidence that will increase the proportion of correct decisions should be accepted as the basis for allocations regardless of its epistemic deficiency. Finally, some important practical aspects of the conclusion are considered.

AB - The use of algorithms to support prediction-based decision-making is becoming commonplace in a range of domains including health, criminal justice, education, social services, lending, and hiring. An assumption governing such decisions is that there is a property Y such that individual a should be allocated resource R by decision-maker D if a is Y. When there is uncertainty about whether a is Y, algorithms may provide valuable decision support by accurately predicting whether a is Y on the basis of known features of a. Based on recent work on statistical evidence in epistemology this article presents an argument against relying exclusively on algorithmic predictions to allocate resources when they provide purely statistical evidence that a is Y. The article then responds to the objection that any evidence that will increase the proportion of correct decisions should be accepted as the basis for allocations regardless of its epistemic deficiency. Finally, some important practical aspects of the conclusion are considered.

U2 - 10.1007/s11229-023-04246-8

DO - 10.1007/s11229-023-04246-8

M3 - Journal article

VL - 202

JO - Synthese

JF - Synthese

SN - 0039-7857

M1 - 28

ER -

ID: 359380905