ArticleScientific reports2026
Multi-task adversarial learning detects intersectional algorithmic bias in AI recruitment systems.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the widespread application of artificial intelligence in recruitment, algorithmic bias issues have become increasingly prominent, seriously threatening social fairness and job seekers' rights. Addressing the limitations of existing bias detection methods in detection granularity, fairness assessment, and interpretability, this study proposes a deep learning-based algorithmic bias detection framework. The framework designs a multi-task adversarial learning architecture that achieves fine-grained intersectional bias detection through attention mechanisms; constructs a multi-dimensional evaluation system comprising nine metrics across three major categories including group fairness, individual fairness, and causal fairness, employing Pareto frontier analysis to reveal fairness trade-off relationships; and integrates an interpretability module based on SHAP values, gradient-weighted class activation mapping, and causal mediation analysis to achieve precise localization of bias sources. Experimental results demonstrate that the framework improves intersectional bias detection accuracy by 12-18% points compared to traditional methods, providing effective technical support and theoretical guidance for fairness improvement in AI recruitment systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.