SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Algorithms 'consistently' more accurate than people in predicting recidivism, study says:
In a study with potentially far-reaching implications for criminal justice in the United States, a team of California researchers has found that algorithms are significantly more accurate than humans in predicting which defendants will later be arrested for a new crime.
[...] "Risk assessment has long been a part of decision-making in the criminal justice system," said Jennifer Skeem, a psychologist who specializes in criminal justice at UC Berkeley. "Although recent debate has raised important questions about algorithm-based tools, our research shows that in contexts resembling real criminal justice settings, risk assessments are often more accurate than human judgment in predicting recidivism. That's consistent with a long line of research comparing humans to statistical tools."
"Validated risk-assessment instruments can help justice professionals make more informed decisions," said Sharad Goel, a computational social scientist at Stanford University. "For example, these tools can help judges identify and potentially release people who pose little risk to public safety. But, like any tools, risk assessment instruments must be coupled with sound policy and human oversight to support fair and effective criminal justice reform."
The paper—"The limits of human predictions of recidivism"—was slated for publication Feb. 14, 2020, in Science Advances. Skeem presented the research on Feb. 13 in a news briefing at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in Seattle, Wash. Joining her were two co-authors: Ph.D. graduate Jongbin Jung and Ph.D. candidate Zhiyuan "Jerry" Lin, who both studied computational social science at Stanford.
More information:
Z. Lin, et al. The limits of human predictions of recidivism [open], Science Advances (DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aaz0652)
(Score: 5, Interesting) by KilroySmith on Wednesday February 19 2020, @05:28PM (2 children)
So if we were intelligent animals, we would be going down this path in order to determine which offenders need the most help after release to avoid recidivism. Instead, sadly, we'll use this to algorithmically choose who get freed early, and who serves out every minute of their sentence and gets followed by the police after release so they can be tossed back in the clink the moment they spit on the sidewalk. And, of course, the algorithm will determine that rich white men in politics or finance will be the "least likely" to offend, so they'll all get released early or never get sentenced to jail at all. So, no different than today.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday February 19 2020, @08:44PM
... life would be so much simpler. Predictive behavior models would actually work. Incentive programs would work as intended. We might even structurally eliminate the tragedy of the commons.
'tis not the world we live in.
Don't need an algorithm for that, the judges (and the rest of them) recognize who is most likely to further their political aspirations and they treat them accordingly - already.
'tis the world we live in.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 21 2020, @07:53AM
If we were intelligent animals, we wouldn't need prisons. We do because there's a lot of very stupid and very dangerous people with no self control and no ethical or moral compass.
I could, in general, not care less about all the white collar crime or drug crime in the world. Live in a world where you should only place your money with those you trust, and people are free to do whatever they want to their own bodies? Sure, why not. It's the violent, petty, and idiotic crime that bothers me. It's the reason you need to lock down every single frigging thing you value - your home/car/bike/etc, why it's dangerous to walk down the street in most cities in "urban" areas at night, and so much more. It's a bit paradoxical. White collar crime, in terms of dollar amount, is almost certainly a much larger burden on society than petty crime - yet it's the latter that completely screws up society.
For instance I live in a developing nation. And it's absolutely amazing what life is like in a nation where that sort of petty crime that's ubiquitous in the US is practically non-existent. There's one food court I quite like to eat lunch at. I'd say it's in a business district but it's also like a 2 minute walk from a red light district, so don't get the wrong impression. Anyhow the business folk also like to come there to eat lunch. It gets jam packed. Know how they claim tables? Generally by laying their purse/wallet/ID/etc on it. For somebody who spent their entire life in the US, this was like a scene from another planet. But it wasn't another planet - just a nation without a bunch of low IQ psychopaths screwing everything over for everybody else.