What is algorithmic bias?
Algorithms lie at the core of computer systems, providing a set of rules or instructions that non-human entities, such as machines, follow to perform specific tasks. These algorithms can be simple or complex, making decisions based on the given information. They are commonly used for sorting data, retrieving specific information, and making automatic decisions. As the demand for new technology intensifies, algorithmic systems have become increasingly prevalent. However, these systems can sometimes produce outcomes that disadvantage certain groups based on characteristics like race, gender, ethnicity, religion, or disability. When such unfair or biased decisions occur, it gives rise to algorithmic bias or discrimination, potentially leading to litigation in a relatively uncharted field.
How does algorithmic bias occur in various industries and sectors?
Algorithmic bias can arise in any sector that utilizes algorithms. For instance, when you open your social media feed in the morning and check it again before bed, the information and advertisements you encounter are largely determined by an algorithm. This algorithm might amplify or mute certain information based on assumptions about your interests. As a result, these algorithms may perpetuate biases or discrimination due to flaws in the training data or the design choices made during their development.
What are some consequences of algorithmic bias?
Algorithmic bias can perpetuate inequalities and reinforce stereotypes, leading to systemic discrimination. For instance, imagine having an interest in further education, and your social media feed consistently displays advertisements for limited options based on your socioeconomic status, friendship circle, or geographic location. Such biased advertising may reinforce erroneous ideas about which educational opportunities are suitable for certain groups.
How can algorithmic bias impact decision-making processes in legal contexts?
Algorithmic bias has the potential to significantly influence critical matters. For example, consider a scenario where consulting services use AI-driven algorithms to match contractors with host employers. While this approach may seem innovative, the algorithm's inherent bias may lead to unequal employment opportunities for certain contractors. They might receive lower-paying positions, be sent to remote locations, or end up with unfavorable employers, while other candidates secure better job opportunities.
What are the legal implications of algorithmic bias in Australia?
Existing legal frameworks in Australia may address algorithmic bias under discrimination, privacy, and consumer protection laws. Anti-discrimination laws at both the federal and state levels prohibit discrimination based on protected characteristics. Additionally, privacy legislation may provide relief if private information is used discriminatorily, with remedies available from the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner. The Australian Consumer Law prohibits false or misleading representations, even when made through automated systems. In cases like the earlier example, where a contractor receives a misleading job match due to an inherent bias in the algorithm, a class action might perhaps be pursued to address wrongs that are common to a multitude of individuals.
What challenges might arise when litigating algorithmic bias cases?
Litigating algorithmic bias cases presents challenges, primarily establishing a causal link between the algorithm's use and the discriminatory outcome. This requires extensive discovery, expert testimony, and careful analysis of relevant data to determine if the alleged bias indeed occurred. Acquiring the necessary information can be difficult, as much of it may be considered commercially sensitive or classified as trade secrets. Furthermore, frequent updates to algorithms could complicate matters if there are multiple revisions to the underlying data by the time a case is brought.
What factors should be considered when determining if algorithmic bias exists in a particular case?
Several critical factors must be considered in identifying algorithmic bias, including the underlying data, the decision-making process, the system's design, and expert analysis to quantify alleged bias through statistical analysis of outcomes. Experts in discrimination law, privacy, and consumer law must collaborate to build or defend the case effectively.
What legal remedies may be available where there is such bias?
Proving algorithmic bias may require preliminary discovery, leading to various remedies like injunctive relief to mitigate bias or compensation for the harm suffered. Additionally, specific legislative intervention might be necessary to address potential bias threats, advocating for mandatory algorithmic audits, transparency, and accountability.
What can companies do to reduce this type of risk?
Apart from the examples mentioned earlier, companies should consider implementing policies promoting algorithmic literacy and responsible AI use among their team members to foster public trust.
Extensive use of algorithms and class actions
With the extensive use of algorithms and Artificial Intelligence in businesses, it is highly probable that some class actions will follow to address any instances of algorithmic bias.
So, the next time you are on social media and see "jobs recommended for you" based on "your profile and search history," you may very well just wonder, "Am I being discriminated against?
Sources: -
Algorithmic bias detection and mitigation: Best practices and policies to reduce consumer harms | Brookings. (n.d.). Retrieved July 17, 2023, from https://www.brookings.edu/articles/algorithmic-bias-detection-and-mitigation-best-practices-and-policies-to-reduce-consumer-harms/
Algorithms Were Supposed to Reduce Bias in Criminal Justice—Do They? | The Brink | Boston University. (n.d.). Retrieved July 17, 2023, from https://www.bu.edu/articles/2023/do-algorithms-reduce-bias-in-criminal-justice/
ANALYSIS: Algorithmic Bias Is No Longer Under Regulators’ Radar (2). (n.d.). Retrieved July 17, 2023, from https://news.bloomberglaw.com/bloomberg-law-analysis/analysis-algorithmic-bias-is-no-longer-under-regulators-radar
Australia considers ban on ‘high-risk’ uses of AI such as deepfakes and algorithmic bias | Artificial intelligence (AI) | The Guardian. (2023, May). https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jun/01/australian-government-considers-ban-on-high-risk-uses-of-ai-such-as-deepfakes-and-algorithmic-bias
DOJ Settles Claims of Algorithmic Bias. (n.d.). Retrieved July 17, 2023, from https://www.orrick.com/en/Insights/2022/06/DOJ-Settles-Claims-of-Algorithmic-Bias
LexisNexis. (n.d.). Rule of Robots vs Rule of Law | LexisNexis® Australia. Retrieved July 17, 2023, from https://www.lexisnexis.com.au/en/insights-and-analysis/rule-of-law/2019/algorithmic-bias-in-the-courtroom-how-to-fight-it
Untitled. (n.d.-a). Retrieved July 17, 2023, from https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2022-bias-in-algorithms_en.pdf
Untitled. (n.d.-b). Retrieved July 17, 2023, from https://www.iadclaw.org/assets/1/7/18.1_-_REVIEWED-_Serwin-_Algorithmic_Bias.pdf
What Do We Do About the Biases in AI? (2019, October). https://hbr.org/2019/10/what-do-we-do-about-the-biases-in-ai