提出两阶段框架,治理技能匹配中的偏见,提升招聘公平性。
From Skill Extraction to Multistakeholder Recommendation: A Two-Stage Framework for Bias Governance in Skills-Based Job Matching

- 分两阶段:先提取技能并识别偏见,再多主体推荐融合决策
- 用分布审计与反事实测试生成偏见清单,区分需纠正或记录的约束
- 适合关注招聘公平、合规和可审计推荐系统的开发者
基于AI的劳动力市场系统在组织候选人排名或雇佣决策前可能影响求职机会。此类应用需谨慎,因为技能提取、档案构建及候选人-岗位匹配中的偏见可能导致对候选人的不公平对待。本文提出一个两阶段框架,用于检测和管理技能匹配中的偏见。第一阶段聚焦技能提取与档案构建,关注候选人如何向系统提供技能与偏好,系统如何提取与结构化信息,以及由此带来的偏见风险,特别关注基于聊天机器人的采集方式。第二阶段为多利益相关方候选人-岗位推荐,将候选者、企业与监管方目标分别由独立代理表示,各自生成候选-岗位排名,通过基于社会选择的聚合形成单一可审计推荐结果。两阶段间共享硬约束(必须修正)与软约束(需记录)的区分机制。依据符合《人工智能法案》的评估方法(基于弗劳恩霍夫AI评估目录),采用分布审计与反事实测试生成第一阶段的偏见清单,按硬/软约束分类;后者用于设定第二阶段的公平阈值。同样逻辑适用于第二阶段:公平指标超过预设阈值时触发调整推荐流程,较小偏差则记录为偏见报告与持续公平状态。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
AI-based labor-market systems or platforms can affect access to job opportunities prior to organizational candidate rankings or hiring decisions. Such applications warrant caution, as biases in skill extraction, profile formation, and candidate-job matching may contribute to unfair treatment of candidates. In this paper, we propose a two-stage framework for detecting and governing bias in skills-based job matching. Stage 1, skill extraction and profile formation, addresses how candidates provide skills and preferences to the system, how the system extracts and structures this information, and the bias risks this entails, with a focus on chatbot-based elicitation. Stage 2, multistakeholder candidate-job recommendation, would embed this information in a recommender system in which candidate, company, and regulatory objectives are represented by separate agents, each producing an independent candidate-job ranking; these rankings would be combined through social choice-based aggregation into a single, auditable recommendation. The two stages are connected by a shared distinction between hard constraints, which require correction before processing continues, and soft constraints, which are logged to inform later decisions. Following an AI Act-aligned assessment methodology (based on the Fraunhofer AI Assessment Catalog), we propose using distributional auditing and counterfactual testing to produce a Stage 1 bias inventory sorted into hard and soft constraints, with the latter informing fairness thresholds for Stage 2. The same logic would apply to Stage 2: fairness metrics crossing predefined thresholds would trigger an adapted recommendation process, while smaller deviations would be logged as bias reports and persistent fairness states.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。