Casino Win uno how to h the great wall slot games
Machine Bias
There's software being used across the country to predict future criminals. And it's biased against black people.
By Julia Angwin, Jeff Larson, Surya Mattu, and Lauren Kirchner, ProPublica, May 23, 2016One spring afternoon in 2014, Breesha Borden was running late to pick up her godmother from school when she spotted an unlocked blue Huffy bike and a silver Razor scooter for kids. Borden and a friend grabbed the bikes and scooter and set off for a ride through the streets of Coral Springs, a suburb of Fort Lauderdale.
When the 18-year-old girls realized they were too big for the tiny vehicles that belonged to a 6-year-old boy, one woman ran after them, saying, "That's my kid's." Borden and her friend quickly left the bikes and scooters and walked away.
A neighbor who witnessed the robbery had already called the police. Borden and his friend were arrested and charged with robbery and petty theft for stealing a total of $80 worth of items.
Subscribe to the series
Machine Bias: Investigating the Algorithms That Control Our Lives
Read the paper
Get the data
Contrast this with a similar crime: The previous summer, 41-year-old Vernon Prater was caught shoplifting $86. 35 worth of tools from a nearby hardware store.
Prater was a more seasoned criminal. He had already been convicted of armed robbery and attempted armed robbery, and had served five years in prison on top of another armed robbery charge. Borden also had a criminal record, but for minor offenses he committed as a juvenile.
But when Borden and Prater were incarcerated in prison, something strange happened: a computer program spit out scores predicting the likelihood that each would commit a crime in the future. Borden, who is black, was assessed as high risk. Prater, who is white, was assessed as low risk.
Two years later, we know that the computer algorithm was exactly the opposite. Borden has not been charged with any new crimes. Prater is serving an eight-year sentence for breaking into a warehouse later and stealing thousands of dollars worth of electronics.
These scores, called risk assessments, are becoming increasingly common in courtrooms across the U. S. They are used at every stage of the criminal justice system to help decide who to release, from setting bail, as in Fort Lauderdale, to more fundamental decisions about a defendant's freedom. In Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin, the results of these assessments are presented to judges at criminal sentencing.
Assessing a defendant's future risk of committing crimes is often done in conjunction with an assessment of the defendant's rehabilitation needs. The Department of Justice's National Institute for Rehabilitation and Parole now encourages the use of these combined assessments at every stage of the criminal justice process, and a landmark sentencing reform bill currently before Congress would mandate their use in federal prisons.
2 petty theft arrests
| Previous convictions | 2 armed robbery, 1 attempted armed robbery |
|---|---|
| Low risk | 3 |
| Subsequent offenses | 1 grand theft |
| Previous convictions | 4 juvenile misdemeanors |
|---|---|
| High risk | 8 |
| Subsequent offenses | None |
Borden was assessed as being at high risk for future crimes after she and a friend took a child's bike and scooter that had been left outside. She did not reoffend.
In 2014, then-US Attorney General Eric Holder warned that risk scores could inject bias into the courts. He called on the US Sentencing Commission to investigate the use of risk scores. "While these measures were created with the best of intentions, I am concerned that they inadvertently undermine our efforts to ensure individualized and equal justice," he said, "and could exacerbate the unjust and unjust disparities that are already all too common in our criminal justice system and society." "He added.
But the Sentencing Commission never launched an investigation into the risk scores, so ProPublica did so as part of a larger investigation into the powerful but largely hidden influence of algorithms in American life.
We obtained risk scores assigned to more than 7, 000 people arrested in Broward County, Florida, in 2013 and 2014, and then looked at how many of them were charged with new crimes over the next two years.
We found that the scores were wildly unreliable at predicting violent crime: Only 20 percent of people predicted to commit a violent crime actually did so.
The algorithm was somewhat more accurate than a coin flip when it took into account all crimes, including minor offenses such as driving with an expired license. Of those deemed likely to reoffend, 61% were arrested for a second offense within two years.
And we found racial disparities, just as Holder had feared. When predicting the likelihood of reoffending, the algorithm made errors at roughly equal rates for black and white defendants, but in very different ways.
- The formula was especially likely to mislabel black defendants as future criminals, mislabeling them nearly twice as often as white defendants.
- White defendants were mislabeled as low risk more often than black defendants.
Can this disparity be explained by the defendants’ criminal history or the type of crime for which they were arrested? No. We conducted statistical tests to isolate the effect of race from criminal history and recidivism rates, as well as the defendants’ age and sex. Black defendants were predicted to be 77% more likely to commit a violent crime in the future and 45% more likely to commit any kind of crime in the future. (Read the analysis)
The algorithm used to create Florida's risk scores is the product of NorthPoint, a for-profit company. The company disputes our analysis.
In a letter, the company criticized ProPublica's methodology and defended the accuracy of its tests: "NorthPoint does not agree that the results of your analysis, or the assertions based on that analysis, are correct or that they accurately reflect the results of applying the model.
NorthPoint's software is one of the most widely used assessment tools in the country. The company does not release the calculations used to calculate defendants' risk scores, so defendants and the public cannot know what is creating the disparities. (NorthPoint provided Publica on Sunday with the basis of its future crime formula, which includes factors such as education level and whether the defendant has a job. The specific calculations are not public.)
When taking into account all crimes, including minor offenses such as driving with an expired license, the algorithm was somewhat more accurate than a coin flip. Of those deemed likely to reoffend, 61% were 2 are arrested for a second offense within a year.
And, just as Holder feared, we found racial disparities. When predicting the likelihood of reoffending, the algorithm made errors at roughly equal rates for black and white defendants, but in very different ways.
The formula was especially likely to misidentify black defendants as future criminals, mislabeling them nearly twice as often as white defendants.
White defendants were misclassified as low risk more often than black defendants.
Can this disparity be explained by the defendants' criminal history or the type of crime for which they were arrested? No. We conducted statistical tests to isolate the effect of race from criminal history and recidivism rates, as well as from the defendants' age and sex. Black defendants were 77% more likely to commit a violent crime in the future, and 10% more likely to commit any type of crime in the future. 45% higher. (Read the analysis)
The algorithm used to create Florida's risk score is the product of NorthPoint, a for-profit company. The company disputes our analysis.
In a letter, the company criticized ProPublica's methodology and defended the accuracy of the test: "NorthPoint does not agree that the results of your analysis, or the assertions based on that analysis, are correct or accurately reflect the results of applying the model.
NorthPoint's software is one of the most widely used assessment tools in the country. The company does not release the calculations used to calculate defendants' risk scores, so defendants and the public can't know what's creating the disparities. (NorthPoint provided Publica on Sunday the basis of its future crime formula, which includes factors such as education level and whether a defendant has a job. The specific calculations are not public.) The algorithm was somewhat more accurate than a coin flip when it took into account all crimes, including minor offenses such as driving with an expired license. Of those deemed likely to reoffend, 61% were arrested for a repeat offense within two years. We also found racial disparities, just as Holder had feared. When predicting the likelihood of recidivism, the algorithm made errors at roughly the same rates for black and white defendants, but in very different ways.
The formula was particularly likely to mislabel black defendants as future criminals, mislabeling them nearly twice as often as white defendants.
White defendants were mislabeled as low risk more often than black defendants.
| The algorithm used to create Florida's risk score is the product of NorthPoint, a for-profit company that disputes our analysis. | In the letter, the company criticized ProPublica's methodology and defended the accuracy of its tests: "NorthPoint does not agree that your analysis, or the assertions based on that analysis, are correct or that they accurately reflect the results of applying the model." |
|---|---|
| Low risk | 3 |
| Subsequent offenses | The appeal of the risk score is clear. The United States has been confined much more than any other country, and among the most dispropended blacks are being confined. For more than two centuries, important decisions in legal procedures, from pr e-trials to judgments and parole, have been left to human hands led by instinct and personal prejudice. |
| The algorithm used to create Florida's risk score is the product of NorthPoint, a for-profit company that disputes our analysis. | However, James Babler was watching Gily's results. The North Point software rated Gilly as a high risk of future violent crimes and the general risk of recidivism. "Looking at the risk evaluation, it's so bad that this is it." |
|---|---|
| High risk | 10 |
| Subsequent offenses | None |
Paul Gilly first heard his scores and understood how much it was during the decision on February 15, 2013 in a court in Baron County, Wisconsin. Gilly was convicted of stealing a turf mower and some tools. The prosecutor was in prison for a year in a county prison, and suggested that Gilly would follow up to "walk on the right path." His lawyer agreed to the judicial transaction.
However, James Babler was watching Gily's results. The North Point software rated Gilly as a high risk of future violent crimes and the general risk of recidivism. "Looking at the risk evaluation, it's so bad that this is it."
The Bubbler then overturned the judicial transactions that the prosecutor and the defense had agreed, and took two years to the state prison and three years under the supervision. The main product of the North Point is a series of scores derived from the 137 questions extracted from the criminal record. Race is not one of the questions. In this survey, we ask the defendant: "Have you ever been sent to prison or prison?" How many people have you ever quarreled? He is also asking for pros and cons on the description, such as "the hungry person has the right to steal" and "it is dangerous to get angry or sharp."
The appeal of the risk score is clear. The United States has been confined much more than any other country, of which the number of disproportionate blacks has been confined. For more than two centuries, important decisions in legal procedures, from pr e-trials to judgments and parole, have been left to human hands led by instinct and personal prejudice.
If a computer can accurately predict which defendant is likely to commit a new crime, the criminal judicial system will be more fair and will be able to sort out who will be imprisoned and how long. Of course, the trick is to make the computer a correct result. If a certain direction is wrong, dangerous criminals may be released. If you make a mistake in another direction, you may be unreasonably strict or wait longer than the appropriate period until parole.
Paul Gilly first heard his scores and understood how much it was during the decision on February 15, 2013 in a court in Baron County, Wisconsin. Gilly was convicted of stealing a turf mower and some tools. The prosecutor was in prison for a year in a county prison, and suggested that Gilly would follow up to "walk on the right path." His lawyer agreed to the judicial transaction.
However, James Babler was watching Gily's results. The North Point software rated Gilly as a high risk of future violent crimes and the general risk of recidivism. "Looking at the risk evaluation, it's so bad that this is it."
The Bubbler then overturned the judicial transactions that the prosecutor and the defense had agreed, and took two years to the state prison and three years under the supervision.
For a long time, criminal scholars have tried to predict which criminals are more dangerous before judging whether to release a criminal. According to a survey of the Danger Evaluation Tool by Professor Bernard Harcoat, a professor at Colombia University, races, nationality, skin color, etc. were often used for such predictions until the 1970s, but politically. It is no longer acceptable.
In the 1980s, as the waves of crimes wrapped around the United States, the lawyers made it more difficult for the judge and the parole release to exercise discretion in making such a decision. Each state and the federal government introduced a forced sentence, in some cases, abolished parole, and reduced the importance of evaluating individual criminals.
However, as each state suffers from expanding prison and prison, the forecast of crime risk is revived.
Two men arrested for possession of drugs
Dylan Fugett
Criminal record
1 attempted robbery
Low risk
Subsequent crimes
3 cases of drugs
Bernard Parker
Criminal record
1 resistance to arrest without violence 1
Hig h-risk
Subsequent crimes
none
Fuget was rated after being arrested in cocaine and marijuana. Later, he was arrested three times for drug charges.
Some are created by profi t-profit companies like North Points, while others have created by no n-profit organizations. (The tools called "Public Safety Assessment" used in Kentucky and Arizona, etc. were developed by the Laura & John Arnold Foundation, and the Foundation is also a fundable fund provider).
There are few unique research on crime risk evaluation. In 2013, researchers Sarah Deathmarei and Jay Singh were investigated 19 different risk evaluation methods used in the United States, and "most of the time, only one or two studies were examined." He discovered that "those surveys are often completed by the same people who have developed the evaluation method."
| Previous convictions | However, as each state suffers from expanding prison and prison, the forecast of crime risk is revived. |
|---|---|
| Low risk | 2 |
| Subsequent offenses | Criminal record |
| Previous convictions | Subsequent crimes |
|---|---|
| High risk | 8 |
| Subsequent offenses | None |
1 resistance to arrest without violence 1
Hig h-risk
| Previous convictions | Fuget was rated after being arrested in cocaine and marijuana. Later, he was arrested three times for drug charges. |
|---|---|
| Low risk | 1 |
| Subsequent offenses | As a result of analyzing research up to 2012, Desmarei responded to the interview, saying that these tools were "at most medium in terms of predictable validity." He also examined whether the risk score was racially biased, and did not find a substantial series of research in the United States. "There is no data." For a long time, criminal scholars have tried to predict which criminals are more dangerous before judging whether to release a criminal. According to a survey of the Danger Evaluation Tool by Professor Bernard Harcoat, a professor at Colombia University, races, nationality, skin color, etc. were often used for such predictions until the 1970s, but politically. It is no longer acceptable. |
| Previous convictions | Two men arrested for possession of drugs |
|---|---|
| Dylan Fugett | 6 |
| Subsequent offenses | None |
Low risk
Subsequent crimes
3 cases of drugs
Bernard Parker
Criminal record
1 resistance to arrest without violence 1
Hig h-risk
Subsequent crimes
none
Fuget was rated after being arrested in cocaine and marijuana. Later, he was arrested three times for drug charges.
Some are created by profi t-profit companies like North Points, while others have created by no n-profit organizations. (The tools called "Public Safety Assessment" used in Kentucky and Arizona, etc. were developed by the Laura & John Arnold Foundation, and the Foundation is also a fundable fund provider).
There are few unique research on crime risk evaluation. In 2013, researchers Sarah Deathmarei and Jay Singh were investigated 19 different risk evaluation methods used in the United States, and "most of the time, only one or two studies were examined." He discovered that "those surveys are often completed by the same people who have developed the evaluation method."
| As a result of analyzing research up to 2012, Desmarei responded to the interview, saying that these tools were "at most medium in terms of predictable validity." He also examined whether the risk score was racially biased, and did not find a substantial series of research in the United States. "There is no data." | Since then, there have been some attempts to explore races in risk score. A study in 2016 investigated the validity of the North Points, which was used to determine about 35, 000 federal inmates, not from the North Points. Jennifer Schemp at the University of California University Berkeley School and Christopher T. Lowenkamp, the US Court Administration Bureau, have discovered that the average score of blacks is high, but the difference is not due to bias. Ta. | |
|---|---|---|
| Increasing the use of risk scores is a debate, and last year it was featured in the media, including articles on AP communication, Marshall Project, and Five Thirty Eight. | Most of the latest risk tools were originally designed to provide judges about the types of treatments that could be needed, from drug treatment to mental health counseling. 。 | "If the risk evaluation tool will be the judge to be carried out to the judge, said," If the risk evaluation tool will be the judge to be carried out to the judge. , We need to provide many services. |
| However, being judged to be inappropriate by alternative therapy could lead to imprisonment, especially during a judgment. There are rare opportunities for the defendant to disagree with his evaluation. The results are usually shared with the defendant's lawyer, but the calculation of the basic data converted into a score is rarely revealed. | Christopher Slobogin, a criminal judiciary director at the University of Vanderville, said, "The risk assessment should not be allowed unless both parties can see all the data used in the assessment." say. "Open, it should be a ful l-minded hostile procedure." | Black defendant's risk score |
White defendant's risk score
These graphs indicate that the white defendant's score is biased in a lo w-risk category. The black defendant's score was not. (Source: Data analysis in Bloward County, Florida by Propublica) < SPAN> Since then, there have been some attempts to explore the gangliar races of risk scores. A study in 2016 investigated the validity of the North Points, which was used to determine about 35, 000 federal inmates, not from the North Points. Jennifer Schemp at the University of California University Berkeley School and Christopher T. Lowenkamp, the US Court Administration Bureau, have discovered that the average score of blacks is high, but the difference is not due to bias. Ta.
Increasing the use of risk scores is a debate, and last year it was featured in the media, including articles on AP communication, Marshall Project, and Five Thirty Eight.
Most of the latest risk tools were originally designed to provide judges about the types of treatments that could be needed, from drug treatment to mental health counseling. 。
"If the risk evaluation tool will be the judge to be carried out to the judge, said," If the risk evaluation tool will be the judge to be carried out to the judge. , We need to provide many services.
However, being judged to be inappropriate by alternative therapy could lead to imprisonment, especially during a judgment. There are rare opportunities for the defendant to disagree with his evaluation. The results are usually shared with the defendant's lawyer, but the calculation of the basic data converted into a score is rarely revealed.
Christopher Slobogin, a criminal judiciary director at the University of Vanderville, said, "The risk assessment should not be allowed unless both parties can see all the data used in the assessment." say. "Open, it should be a ful l-minded hostile procedure."
Black defendant's risk score
White defendant's risk score
These graphs indicate that the white defendant's score is biased in a lo w-risk category. The black defendant's score was not. (Source: Data analysis in Bloward County, Florida by Propublica) Since then, there have been some attempts to explore risk scores. A study in 2016 investigated the validity of the North Points, which was used to determine about 35, 000 federal inmates, not from the North Points. Jennifer Schemp at the University of California University Berkeley School and Christopher T. Lowenkamp, the US Court Administration Bureau, have discovered that the average score of blacks is high, but the difference is not due to bias. Ta.
Increasing the use of risk scores is a debate, and last year it was featured in the media, including articles on AP communication, Marshall Project, and Five Thirty Eight.
Most of the latest risk tools were originally designed to provide judges about the types of treatments that could be needed, from drug treatment to mental health counseling. 。
"If the risk evaluation tool will be the judge to be carried out to the judge, said," If the risk evaluation tool will be the judge to be carried out to the judge. , We need to provide many services.
However, being judged to be inappropriate by alternative therapy could lead to imprisonment, especially during a judgment. There is rarely the opportunity for the defendant to disagree with his evaluation. The results are usually shared with the defendant's lawyer, but the calculation of the basic data converted into a score is rarely revealed.
"The risk assessment should not be acceptable unless both parties can see all data used for the assessment," said Christopher Slobogin, a criminal judicial program director at the University of Vanderville. say. "Open, it should be a ful l-minded hostile procedure."
Black defendant's risk score
| Previous convictions | Proponents of risk scores argue they can be used to lower incarceration rates. In 2002, Virginia was one of the first states to begin using a risk assessment tool for sentencing nonviolent felons. In 2014, Virginia judges who used the tool sent nearly half of their defendants to alternative facilities to prison, according to a report from the State Sentencing Commission. Since 2005, Virginia's prison population growth has slowed to 5% from 31% a decade earlier. |
|---|---|
| Low risk | 3 |
| Subsequent offenses | 1 grand theft |
| The algorithm used to create Florida's risk score is the product of NorthPoint, a for-profit company that disputes our analysis. | James Rivelli, 54, of Hollywood, Florida, was arrested two years ago for shoplifting seven boxes of Crest Whitestrips from a CVS drug store. Despite a conviction for aggravated assault, multiple thefts and felony drug trafficking, NorthPoint's algorithm classified him as a low risk of reoffending. |
|---|---|
| Dylan Fugett | 6 |
| Subsequent offenses | None |
Wells had built a priso n-related system for his prison. "It was a beautiful work," Brennan said in an interview conducted before the analysis of Propublica was completed. Brennan and Wells were common in Brennan in that they like measurement of personality characteristics, such as intelligence, extrovert, and introverts, which Brennan is called "quantitative classification." They decided to create a risk evaluation score for the orthodontic industry.
Brennan wanted to improve LSI (Level of Service Inventory), a typical risk evaluation score developed in Canada. "LSI had a considerable weakness. He was looking for a tool that responded to major theories about the cause of crime.
Brennan and Wells have named the product "Correction Criminal Management Profiling Profiling for alternative sanctions". This is not only risk, but also nearly 20 s o-called "criminal generation needs" related to the main theory of criminality, such as "criminal personality", "social isolation", "drug abuse", "residence / stability". Is also evaluated. The defendant is ranked low, medium, and high in each category.
2 robbery arrests
Anthony Vitiero
Criminal record
1 forked checks, 1 boy light crime
Low risk
Subsequent crimes
3 robbery
Lassheim White
Criminal record
Shonen Crime 2
Hig h-risk
Subsequent crimes
none
Vitiello stealed the copper tube from the air conditioner and was evaluated as low risk. After that, he entered three houses. White was rated as a high risk and stealed a castereo speaker. No recidivism. -& gt;
2 people arrested for drunk driving
accepted