arXiv:2507. 11548v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The use of publicly available generative AI systems for resume evaluation is often justified by the assumption that these tools reduce bias relative to human judgment.
By Kevin T Webster
The paper introduces FAPE, a four‑stage framework for evaluating the post‑processing fairness intervention ThresholdOptimizer across eight diverse domains, including criminal justice, finance, healthcare, and education. It reports that the intervention reduces disparity in most high‑disparity cases but can worsen fairness when baseline disparities are low, and that a single deployment‑time audit is unreliable without continuous monitoring and baseline‑disparity screening.
By Nithin Raghava Ramachandra Narla
The paper proposes a scalable, automated method for auditing candidate‑job matching systems for demographic bias. It employs large‑language‑model agents to generate neutral resumes, injects controlled demographic variations, ranks candidates with a fine‑tuned embedding model, and evaluates nine fairness metrics across counterfactual, group‑fairness, and merit‑aware families, producing a composite risk report. Experiments on a small corpus show that single‑score audits miss nuanced issues, underscoring the need for multi‑metric evaluation and LLM‑generated audits as a low‑cost complement to human reviews.
By Sai Yashwant, Shruti Bansal, Anurag Dubey, Samaroha Chatterjee, Satyam Kumar, Shreyash Gupta, Gantala Thulsiram
The paper introduces SCOPED‑Hiring, a process‑aware fairness diagnosis pipeline for large language model (LLM) based multi‑agent hiring systems. It generates controlled resume variants, runs role‑based hiring committees, and logs over 311,000 structured decision trajectories, converting them into quantitative fairness signals across six diagnostic lenses: final outcome, counterfactual, process, pathway, dynamic, and design effects. The study finds that balanced final hire rates can conceal hidden trajectory unfairness—such as career gaps, proxy cues, and identity cues—and demonstrates that targeted repairs guided by these diagnoses can reduce the total layered burden by 72.3% while only slightly altering the hire rate.
By Yiran Zhao, Lu Zhou, Liming Fang, Yufei Chen, Jiafei Wu, Zhe Liu, Xiaogang Xu
arXiv:2607. 28934v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly involved in the distribution of scarce resources, raising concerns about biased allocations based on characteristics like race and gender.
By Martin Lukk (University of Toronto)
The study examines how the choice of large language model (LLM) used to write job application cover letters influences hiring decisions, independent of the applicant’s qualifications. Using a multi‑model audit with eleven writer agents and nine evaluator agents across ten job descriptions, the authors find a consistent ranking of writer models—locally hosted models are disadvantaged and evaluators often favor their own outputs. The hierarchy has tangible effects, with up to 1.8 of 25 qualified candidates being rejected solely due to model mismatch, and the patterns are explained by shared stylistic cues that both writers and evaluators reward or penalise.
By Nicol\`o Pagan, Michael Andreas Ebling, Stefania Ionescu, Anik\'o Hann\'ak