Code is law: how COMPAS affects the way the judiciary handles the risk of recidivism

Artificial Intelligence and Law:1-23 (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Judges in multiple US states, such as New York, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, California, and Florida, receive a prediction of defendants’ recidivism risk, generated by the COMPAS algorithm. If judges act on these predictions, they implicitly delegate normative decisions to proprietary software, even beyond the previously documented race and age biases. Using the ProPublica dataset, we demonstrate that COMPAS predictions favor jailing over release. COMPAS is biased against defendants. We show that this bias can largely be removed. Our proposed correction increases overall accuracy, and attenuates anti-black and anti-young bias. However, it also slightly increases the risk that defendants are released who commit a new crime before tried. We argue that this normative decision should not be buried in the code. The tradeoff between the interests of innocent defendants and of future victims should not only be made transparent. The algorithm should be changed such that the legislator and the courts do make this choice.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,881

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Should Algorithms that Predict Recidivism Have Access to Race?Duncan Purves & Jeremy Davis - 2023 - American Philosophical Quarterly 60 (2):205-220.
Independence of the Luxembourg Judiciary Through a Council for the Judiciary – A Never-Ending Story.Jean-Claude Wiwinius - 2019 - In Knut Almestad, Jean-Luc Baechler, Benedikt Bogason, Henrik Bull, Francis Delaporte, Luis José Diez Canseco Núñez, Peter Freeman, Vladimir Golitsyn, Irmgard Griss, Marc Jaeger, Koen Lenaerts, Paul Mahoney, Andreas Mundt, Sven Norberg, Toril Marie Øie, Þorgeir Örlygsson, Anne-José Paulsen, Georges Ravarani, Hubertus Schumacher, Vassilios Skouris, Gian-Flurin Steinegger, Sven Erik Svedman, Antonio Tizzano, Marc van der Woude, Bo Vesterdorf & Jean-Claude Wiwinius (eds.), The Art of Judicial Reasoning: Festschrift in Honour of Carl Baudenbacher. Cham: Springer Verlag. pp. 211-220.
Jurisdiction Regarding Administrative Proceedings in Jordanian and French Legislation: Views on the Administrative Judiciary in 2021.Tareq Al-Billeh - 2023 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 37 (1):189-215.
The Australian Judiciary.Enid Campbell & H. P. Lee - 2012 - Cambridge University Press.
What Do These Words Encode?Nigel Love - 2019 - Constructivist Foundations 15 (2):142-144.
Deliberation and Courts: The Role of the Judiciary in a Deliberative System.Donald Bello Hutt - 2017 - Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory 64 (152):77-103.
A Rhetorical Judiciary, Too?Kathleen Hall Jamieson & Jeffrey Gottfried - 2007 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 19 (2):345-357.
Les compas cartésiens.M. Serfati - 1993 - Archives de Philosophie 56:197.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-02-10

Downloads
24 (#657,113)

6 months
24 (#116,937)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references