skip to main content
10.1145/3316782.3322787acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespetraConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Singular race models: addressing bias and accuracy in predicting prisoner recidivism

Published:05 June 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

As machine learning based predictive systems pervade many aspects of our lives, an inherent bias and unfairness surface from time to time in the form of mispredictions in various domains. Recidivism, the tendency of offenders to reoffend after release from prison on parole, is one such domain where one race-based sub-population has been found to be treated more harshly than others. Current practices have focused on eliminating race information from datasets to reduce the predictive bias. In contrast to this, we built Singular Race Models, a novel approach of segmenting the dataset based on race, to train and test single race-based models to increase prediction accuracy and reduce racially inspired bias by considering only one race at a time. We created Singular Race Models for four different crime categories and compared these with base models created using all crimes and all races. This modeling choice helped us increase accuracy and analyze race related discrimination. A three-layered artificial neural network was utilized to do the heavy weight-lifting of recidivism prediction. With the help of several suitable metrics, in this paper, we demonstrate the increase in predictive accuracy of these Singular Race Models in various crime categories and analyze the causes and the secondary effect on bias.

References

  1. US ACM. 2017. Public Policy Council and ACM Europe Policy Committee, 2017. Statement on algorithmic transparency and accountability. (25 May). (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Julia Angwin, Jeff Larson, Surya Mattu, and Lauren Kirchner. 2016. Machine bias: There's software used across the country to predict future criminals. And it's biased against blacks. ProPublica (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Richard Berk. 2012. Criminal Justice Forecasts of Risk: a Machine Learning Approach. Springer-Verlag New York Inc. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Avinash Bhati and Caterina G Roman. 2014. Evaluating and Quantifying the Specific Deterrent Effects of DNA Databases. Evaluation review 38, 1 (2014), 68--93.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Toon Calders and Sicco Verwer. 2010. Three naive Bayes approaches for discrimination-free classification. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 21, 2 (2010), 277--292. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Julia Dressel and Hany Farid. 2018. The accuracy, fairness, and limits of predicting recidivism. Science advances 4, 1 (2018), eaao5580.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Matthew R Durose, Alexia D Cooper, and Howard N Snyder. {n. d.}. Recidivism of prisoners released in 30 states in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Grant Duwe and KiDeuk Kim. 2017. Out with the old and in with the new? An empirical comparison of supervised learning algorithms to predict recidivism. Criminal Justice Policy Review 28, 6 (2017), 570--600.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Anil K Jain, Jianchang Mao, and KM Mohiuddin. 1996. Artificial neural networks: A tutorial. Computer 3 (1996), 31--44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Hyunzee Jung, Solveig Spjeldnes, and Hide Yamatani. 2010. Recidivism and survival time: Racial disparity among jail ex-inmates. Social Work Research 34, 3 (2010), 181--189.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Patrick A Langan and David J Levin. 2002. Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994. Fed. Sent. R. 15 (2002), 58.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Andy Liaw, Matthew Wiener, et al. 2002. Classification and regression by randomForest. R news 2, 3 (2002), 18--22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Osonde A Osoba and William Welser IV. 2017. An intelligence in our image: The risks of bias and errors in artificial intelligence. Rand Corporation. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Turgut Ozkan. 2017. Predicting Recidivism Through Machine Learning. Ph.D. Dissertation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Robert E Schapire. 2013. Explaining adaboost. In Empirical inference. Springer, 37--52.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Faye S Taxman, April Pattavina, Michael S Caudy, James Byrne, and Joseph Durso. 2013. The empirical basis for the RNR model with an updated RNR conceptual framework. In Simulation strategies to reduce recidivism. Springer, 73--111.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Singular race models: addressing bias and accuracy in predicting prisoner recidivism

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      PETRA '19: Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments
      June 2019
      655 pages
      ISBN:9781450362320
      DOI:10.1145/3316782

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 5 June 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader