Decision Time: Normative Dimensions of Algorithmic Speed

ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT '22) (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Existing discussions about automated decision-making focus primarily on its inputs and outputs, raising questions about data collection and privacy on one hand and accuracy and fairness on the other. Less attention has been devoted to critically examining the temporality of decision-making processes—the speed at which automated decisions are reached. In this paper, I identify four dimensions of algorithmic speed that merit closer analysis. Duration (how much time it takes to reach a judgment), timing (when automated systems intervene in the activity being evaluated), frequency (how often evaluations are performed), and lived time (the human experience of algorithmic speed) are interrelated, but distinct, features of automated decision-making. Choices about the temporal structure of automated decision-making systems have normative implications, which I describe in terms of "disruption," "displacement," "re-calibration," and "temporal fairness," with values such as accuracy, fairness, accountability, and legitimacy hanging in the balance. As computational tools are increasingly tasked with making judgments about human activities and practices, the designers of decision-making systems will have to reckon, I argue, with when—and how fast—judgments ought to be rendered. Though computers are capable of reaching decisions at incredible speeds, failing to account for the temporality of automated decision-making risks misapprehending the costs and benefits automation promises.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Ethical Gravity Thesis: Marrian Levels and the Persistence of Bias in Automated Decision-making Systems.Atoosa Kasirzadeh & Colin Klein - 2021 - Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES '21).
Legitimate Power, Illegitimate Automation: The problem of ignoring legitimacy in automated decision systems.Jake Iain Stone & Brent Mittelstadt - forthcoming - The Association for Computing Machinery Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency 2024.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-04-09

Downloads
400 (#52,664)

6 months
131 (#32,434)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Daniel Susser
Cornell University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Thinking, Fast and Slow.Daniel Kahneman - 2011 - New York: New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Truth and method.Hans-Georg Gadamer - 1975 - New York: Continuum. Edited by Joel Weinsheimer & Donald G. Marshall.
The Threat of Algocracy: Reality, Resistance and Accommodation.John Danaher - 2016 - Philosophy and Technology 29 (3):245-268.
Time and free will.Henri Bergson - 1910 - New York,: Humanities Press. Edited by Frank Lubecki Pogson.

View all 20 references / Add more references