AI tools are increasingly replacing human judgements in some settings. For instance, resume screening algorithms are often used in hiring, where they may improve efficiency and consistency in decision-making. But some scholars have raised concerns that the adoption of automated systems could eventually result in one algorithm being used to make all decisions in a particular industry. They worry so-called algorithmic monoculture could have negative consequences. For example, in hiring, the thinking goes that algorithmic monoculture might result in systematic exclusion — a situation in which a job candidate rejected by one firm’s algorithm would likely also be rejected by every other firm’s algorithm. However, MIT researchers now argue that algorithmic monoculture may not always be as bad as some scientists have suggested. They systematically evaluated major objections to algorithmic monoculture, including systematic exclusion, and concluded this and many other arguments either fail or aren’t decisive against all forms of monoculture. Instead, they mathematically prove that monoculture tends to create informational echo chambers that can hinder exploration. In hiring, this could make it less likely that the best candidates would get jobs — however, bundling various hiring algorithms into a single “ensemble” can overcome this limitation, the researchers show. This could sometimes enable monoculture to perform as well as, if not better than, a polyculture where different firms use different algorithms. “A trend toward algorithmic monoculture is a realistic scenario, and a reall
Source: MIT News AI