BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Benjamin Laufer

Benjamin Laufer appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
cs.CYMachine LearningApplicationsArtificial IntelligenceCryptography and SecurityDigital LibrariesSocial and Information Networks

Catalog footprint

What is connected

4works
7topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Accountability in an Algorithmic Society: Relationality, Responsibility, and Robustness in Machine Learning

In 1996, Accountability in a Computerized Society [95] issued a clarion call concerning the erosion of accountability in society due to the ubiquitous delegation of consequential functions to computerized systems. Nissenbaum [95] described four barriers to accountability that computerization presented, which we revisit in relation to the ascendance of data-driven algorithmic systems--i.e., machine learning or artificial intelligence--to uncover new challenges for accountability that these systems present. Nissenbaum's original paper grounded discussion of the barriers in moral philosophy; we bring this analysis together with recent scholarship on relational accountability frameworks and discuss how the barriers present difficulties for instantiating a unified moral, relational framework in practice for data-driven algorithmic systems. We conclude by discussing ways of weakening the barriers in order to do so.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Collective Obfuscation and Crowdsourcing

Crowdsourcing technologies rely on groups of people to input information that may be critical for decision-making. This work examines obfuscation in the context of reporting technologies. We show that widespread use of reporting platforms comes with unique security and privacy implications, and introduce a threat model and corresponding taxonomy to outline some of the many attack vectors in this space. We then perform an empirical analysis of a dataset of call logs from a controversial, real-world reporting hotline and identify coordinated obfuscation strategies that are intended to hinder the platform's legitimacy. We propose a variety of statistical measures to quantify the strength of this obfuscation strategy with respect to the structural and semantic characteristics of the reporting attacks in our dataset.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Four Years of FAccT: A Reflexive, Mixed-Methods Analysis of Research Contributions, Shortcomings, and Future Prospects

Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT) for socio-technical systems has been a thriving area of research in recent years. An ACM conference bearing the same name has been the central venue for scholars in this area to come together, provide peer feedback to one another, and publish their work. This reflexive study aims to shed light on FAccT's activities to date and identify major gaps and opportunities for translating contributions into broader positive impact. To this end, we utilize a mixed-methods research design. On the qualitative front, we develop a protocol for reviewing and coding prior FAccT papers, tracing their distribution of topics, methods, datasets, and disciplinary roots. We also design and administer a questionnaire to reflect the voices of FAccT community members and affiliates on a wide range of topics. On the quantitative front, we use the full text and citation network associated with prior FAccT publications to provide further evidence about topics and values represented in FAccT. We organize the findings from our analysis into four main dimensions: the themes present in FAccT scholarship, the values that underpin the work, the impact of the contributions both within academic circles and beyond, and the practices and informal norms of the community that has formed around FAccT. Finally, our work identifies several suggestions on directions for change, as voiced by community members.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Compounding Injustice: History and Prediction in Carceral Decision-Making

Risk assessment algorithms in criminal justice put people's lives at the discretion of a simple statistical tool. This thesis explores how algorithmic decision-making in criminal policy can exhibit feedback effects, where disadvantage accumulates among those deemed 'high risk' by the state. Evidence from Philadelphia suggests that risk - and, by extension, criminality - is not fundamental or in any way exogenous to political decision-making. A close look at the geographical and demographic properties of risk calls into question the current practice of prediction in criminal policy. Using court docket summaries from Philadelphia, we find evidence of a criminogenic effect of incarceration, even controlling for existing determinants of 'criminal risk'. With evidence that criminal treatment can influence future criminal convictions, we explore the theoretical implications of compounding effects in repeated carceral decisions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access