In this paper, we study a sequential workforce management problem in a contingent labor setting with uncertainty in both worker production and labor supply. A firm seeks to maximize cumulative profit by maintaining an active team of fixed size while learning worker productivity over time. We emphasize two critical operational frictions in this problem: replacing workers is costly, and workers may not be available immediately for hiring because of, for example, prior job commitments, scheduling constraints, or onboarding procedures. Thus, hiring decisions take effect only after a random delay. We formulate this problem as a stochastic multi-play bandit with costly switching and delayed actions, and develop a learning-based hiring policy, DR-UCB (DelayedReplacement-UCB), that makes replacement and hiring decisions sequentially through learning cycles. In each cycle, the policy uses real-time production data to determine when to initiate workforce changes and which workers to replace and hire. We show that the leading-order regret of the proposed policy matches its lower bound in its dependence on the time horizon. Our numerical experiments show that DR-UCB outperforms benchmark polic
Blind and low-vision (BLV) individuals face high unemployment rates. The job search is becoming harder as more employers use AI-driven systems to screen resumes before a human ever sees them. Such AI systems could inadvertently further disadvantage BLV job seekers, introducing additional barriers to an already difficult process. We lack understanding of BLV job seekers' experiences in today's AI-driven hiring ecosystem. Without such understanding, we risk designing technologies that create new systemic barriers for BLV job seekers rather than providing support. To this end, we conducted interviews with 17 BLV job seekers and analyzed their experiences with AI-powered hiring systems. We found that AI hiring systems misrepresented their professional identities and created dehumanizing interactions. To level the playing field, BLV job seekers used strategic counter-navigation: they deployed their own tools to bypass algorithmic screening and built peer networks to share AI literacy. They also practiced 'strategic refusal', choosing to avoid certain AI systems to regain their agency. Unlike prior work that frames job search as an individualistic activity, or one focused on being compli
In an era of increasingly capable foundation models, job seekers are turning to generative AI tools to enhance their application materials. However, unequal access to and knowledge about generative AI tools can harm both employers and candidates by reducing the accuracy of hiring decisions and giving some candidates an unfair advantage. To address these challenges, we introduce a new variant of the strategic classification framework tailored to manipulations performed using large language models, accommodating varying levels of manipulations and stochastic outcomes. We propose a ``two-ticket'' scheme, where the hiring algorithm applies an additional manipulation to each submitted resume and considers this manipulated version together with the original submitted resume. We establish theoretical guarantees for this scheme, showing improvements for both the fairness and accuracy of hiring decisions when the true positive rate is maximized subject to a no false positives constraint. We further generalize this approach to an $n$-ticket scheme and prove that hiring outcomes converge to a fixed, group-independent decision, eliminating disparities arising from differential LLM access. Fina
The main contribution of this paper resides in providing novel algorithmic advances and analytical insights for the sequential hiring problem, a recently introduced dynamic optimization model where a firm adaptively fills a limited number of positions from a pool of applicants with known values and acceptance probabilities. While earlier research established a strong foundation -- notably an LP-based $(1 - \frac{e^{-k}k^k}{k!})$-approximation by Epstein and Ma (Operations Research, 2024) -- the attainability of superior approximation guarantees has remained a central open question. Our work addresses this challenge by establishing the first polynomial-time approximation scheme for sequential hiring, proposing an $O(n^{O(1)} \cdot T^{2^{\tilde{O}(1/ε^{2})}})$-time construction of semi-adaptive policies whose expected reward is within factor $1 - ε$ of optimal. To overcome the constant-factor optimality loss inherent to earlier literature, and to circumvent intrinsic representational barriers of adaptive policies, our approach is driven by the following innovations: -- The block-responsive paradigm: We introduce block-responsive policies, a new class of decision-making strategies, se
The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) in hiring has led to legislative actions to protect vulnerable demographic groups. This paper presents a novel framework for benchmarking hierarchical gender hiring bias in Large Language Models (LLMs) for resume scoring, revealing significant issues of reverse gender hiring bias and overdebiasing. Our contributions are fourfold: Firstly, we introduce a new construct grounded in labour economics, legal principles, and critiques of current bias benchmarks: hiring bias can be categorized into two types: Level bias (difference in the average outcomes between demographic counterfactual groups) and Spread bias (difference in the variance of outcomes between demographic counterfactual groups); Level bias can be further subdivided into statistical bias (i.e. changing with non-demographic content) and taste-based bias (i.e. consistent regardless of non-demographic content). Secondly, the framework includes rigorous statistical and computational hiring bias metrics, such as Rank After Scoring (RAS), Rank-based Impact Ratio, Permutation Test, and Fixed Effects Model. Thirdly, we analyze gender hiring biases in ten state-of-the-art LLMs. Seven out of te
The growing adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has heightened interest in the labor market value of AI related skills, yet causal evidence on their role in hiring decisions remains scarce. This study examines whether AI skills serve as a positive hiring signal and whether they can offset conventional disadvantages such as older age or lower formal education. We conducted an experimental survey with 1,725 recruiters from the United Kingdom, the United States and Germany. Using a paired conjoint design, recruiters evaluated hypothetical candidates represented by synthetically designed resumes. Across three occupations of graphic design, office assistance, and software engineering, AI skills significantly increase interview invitation probabilities by approximately 8 to 15 percentage points, compared with candidates without such skills. AI credentials, such as university or company backed skill certificates, only lead to a moderate increase in invitation probabilities compared with self declaration of AI skills. AI skills also partially or fully offset disadvantages related to age and lower education, with effects strongest for office assistants, for whom formal AI
[Context] Online Recruitment and Selection (R&S) processes are often the first point of contact between early-career software engineers and the tech industry. Yet many candidates experience these processes as opaque, inefficient, or even discouraging. While prior research has extensively documented the flaws and biases in online tech hiring, little is known about the practices that create positive candidate experiences. [Objective & Method] This paper explores such practices, referred to as Constructive Patterns (CPs), from the perspective of early-career software engineers. Guided by Applicant Attribution-Reaction Theory, we conducted 22 semi-structured interviews in which participants collectively described over 470 online R&S experiences. [Results] Through thematic analysis, we identified 22 CPs that reflect positive practices such as comprehensive and transparent job advertisements (CP01), specific and developmental feedback (CP03), humanized and respectful interaction (CP06), and framing the process as a two-way street (CP18). [Conclusion] Our findings extend the conversation on tech hiring beyond diagnosing dysfunctions toward designing for human-centered and grow
With the proliferation of the internet and the rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence, leading technology companies face an urgent annual demand for a considerable number of software and algorithm engineers. To efficiently and effectively identify high-potential candidates from thousands of applicants, these firms have established a multi-stage selection process, which crucially includes a standardized hiring evaluation designed to assess job-specific competencies. Motivated by the demonstrated prowess of Large Language Models (LLMs) in coding and reasoning tasks, this paper investigates a critical question: Can LLMs successfully pass these hiring evaluations? To this end, we conduct a comprehensive examination of a widely used professional assessment questionnaire. We employ state-of-the-art LLMs to generate responses and subsequently evaluate their performance. Contrary to any prior expectation of LLMs being ideal engineers, our analysis reveals a significant inconsistency between the model-generated answers and the company-referenced solutions. Our empirical findings lead to a striking conclusion: All evaluated LLMs fails to pass the hiring evaluation.
Algorithmic hiring has become increasingly necessary in some sectors as it promises to deal with hundreds or even thousands of applicants. At the heart of these systems are algorithms designed to retrieve and rank candidate profiles, which are usually represented by Curricula Vitae (CVs). Research has shown, however, that such technologies can inadvertently introduce bias, leading to discrimination based on factors such as candidates' age, gender, or national origin. Developing methods to measure, mitigate, and explain bias in algorithmic hiring, as well as to evaluate and compare fairness techniques before deployment, requires sets of CVs that reflect the characteristics of people from diverse backgrounds. However, datasets of these characteristics that can be used to conduct this research do not exist. To address this limitation, this paper introduces an approach for building a synthetic dataset of CVs with features modeled on real materials collected through a data donation campaign. Additionally, the resulting dataset of 1,730 CVs is presented, which we envision as a potential benchmarking standard for research on algorithmic hiring discrimination.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in hiring, with large language models (LLMs) having the potential to influence or even make hiring decisions. However, this raises pressing concerns about bias, fairness, and trust, particularly across diverse cultural contexts. Despite their growing role, few studies have systematically examined the potential biases in AI-driven hiring evaluation across cultures. In this study, we conduct a systematic analysis of how LLMs assess job interviews across cultural and identity dimensions. Using two datasets of interview transcripts, 100 from UK and 100 from Indian job seekers, we first examine cross-cultural differences in LLM-generated scores for hirability and related traits. Indian transcripts receive consistently lower scores than UK transcripts, even when they were anonymized, with disparities linked to linguistic features such as sentence complexity and lexical diversity. We then perform controlled identity substitutions (varying names by gender, caste, and region) within the Indian dataset to test for name-based bias. These substitutions do not yield statistically significant effects, indicating that names alone, when isolated fr
Foundation models require fine-tuning to ensure their generative outputs align with intended results for specific tasks. Automating this fine-tuning process is challenging, as it typically needs human feedback that can be expensive to acquire. We present AutoRefine, a method that leverages reinforcement learning for targeted fine-tuning, utilizing direct feedback from measurable performance improvements in specific downstream tasks. We demonstrate the method for a problem arising in algorithmic hiring platforms where linguistic biases influence a recommendation system. In this setting, a generative model seeks to rewrite given job specifications to receive more diverse candidate matches from a recommendation engine which matches jobs to candidates. Our model detects and regulates biases in job descriptions to meet diversity and fairness criteria. The experiments on a public hiring dataset and a real-world hiring platform showcase how large language models can assist in identifying and mitigation biases in the real world.
The growing prominence of large language models (LLMs) in daily life has heightened concerns that LLMs exhibit many of the same gender-related biases as their creators. In the context of hiring decisions, we quantify the degree to which LLMs perpetuate societal biases and investigate prompt engineering as a bias mitigation technique. Our findings suggest that for a given resumé, an LLM is more likely to hire a female candidate and perceive them as more qualified, but still recommends lower pay relative to male candidates.
Large Language Model (LLM) agents are increasingly used in real-world products, where personalized and context-aware user interactions are essential. A central enabler of such capabilities is the agent's long-term semantic memory system, which extracts implicit and explicit signals from noisy longitudinal behavioral data, stores them in a structured form, and supports low-latency retrieval. Building industrial-grade long-term memory for LLM agents raises five challenges: scalability, low-latency retrieval, privacy constraints, adaptability, and observability. We introduce the Hierarchical Long-Term Semantic Memory (HLTM) framework, which organizes textual data into a schema-aligned memory tree that captures semantic knowledge at multiple levels of granularity, enabling scalable ingestion, privacy-aware storage, low-latency retrieval, and transparent provenance; HLTM further incorporates an adaptation mechanism to generalize across diverse use cases. Extensive evaluations on LinkedIn's Hiring Assistant show that HLTM improves answer correctness by more than 5% and retrieval F1 by more than 10%, while significantly advancing the Pareto frontier between query and indexing latency. HLT
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly under scrutiny for perpetuating identity-based discrimination in high-stakes domains such as hiring, particularly against people with disabilities (PwD). However, existing research remains largely Western-centric, overlooking how intersecting forms of marginalization--such as gender and caste--shape experiences of PwD in the Global South. We conduct a comprehensive audit of six LLMs across 2,820 hiring scenarios spanning diverse disability, gender, nationality, and caste profiles. To capture subtle intersectional harms and biases, we introduce ABLEIST (Ableism, Inspiration, Superhumanization, and Tokenism), a set of five ableism-specific and three intersectional harm metrics grounded in disability studies literature. Our results reveal significant increases in ABLEIST harms towards disabled candidates--harms that many state-of-the-art models failed to detect. These harms were further amplified by sharp increases in intersectional harms (e.g., Tokenism) for gender and caste-marginalized disabled candidates, highlighting critical blind spots in current safety tools and the need for intersectional safety evaluations of frontier models in h
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being deployed in high-stakes applications like hiring, yet their potential for unfair decision-making remains understudied in generative and retrieval settings. In this work, we examine the allocational fairness of LLM-based hiring systems through two tasks that reflect actual HR usage: resume summarization and applicant ranking. By constructing a synthetic resume dataset with controlled perturbations and curating job postings, we investigate whether model behavior differs across demographic groups. Our findings reveal that generated summaries exhibit meaningful differences more frequently for race than for gender perturbations. Models also display non-uniform retrieval selection patterns across demographic groups and exhibit high ranking sensitivity to both gender and race perturbations. Surprisingly, retrieval models can show comparable sensitivity to both demographic and non-demographic changes, suggesting that fairness issues may stem from broader model brittleness. Overall, our results indicate that LLM-based hiring systems, especially in the retrieval stage, can exhibit notable biases that lead to discriminatory outcomes in real-
Humble AI (Knowles et al., 2023) argues for cautiousness in AI development and deployments through scepticism (accounting for limitations of statistical learning), curiosity (accounting for unexpected outcomes), and commitment (accounting for multifaceted values beyond performance). We present a real-world case study for humble AI in the domain of algorithmic hiring. Specifically, we evaluate virtual screening algorithms in a widely used hiring platform that matches candidates to job openings. There are several challenges in misrecognition and stereotyping in such contexts that are difficult to assess through standard fairness and trust frameworks; e.g., someone with a non-traditional background is less likely to rank highly. We demonstrate technical feasibility of how humble AI principles can be translated to practice through uncertainty quantification of ranks, entropy estimates, and a user experience that highlights algorithmic unknowns. We describe preliminary discussions with focus groups made up of recruiters. Future user studies seek to evaluate whether the higher cognitive load of a humble AI system fosters a climate of trust in its outcomes.
Software engineers are responsible for developing, maintaining, and innovating software. To hire software engineers, organizations employ a tech hiring pipeline. This process typically consists of a series of steps to evaluate the extent to which applicants meet job requirements and can effectively contribute to a development team -- such as resume screenings and technical interviews. However, research highlights substantial flaws with current tech hiring practices -- such as bias from stress-inducing assessments. As the landscape of software engineering (SE) is dramatically changing, assessing the technical proficiency and abilities of software engineers is an increasingly crucial task to meet technological needs and demands. In this paper, we outline challenges in current hiring practices and present future directions to promote fair and evidence-based evaluations in tech hiring pipelines. Our vision aims to enhance outcomes for candidates and assessments for employers to enhance the workforce in the tech industry.
The field of the mathematical sciences relies on a continuous academic pipeline in which individuals progress from undergraduate study through graduate training and postdoctoral program to long term faculty employment. National statistics report trends in bachelor's, master's, and doctoral degree awards, but these data alone do not explain how individuals move through the academic system or how structural constraints shape downstream career outcomes. Persistent growth in postdoctoral appointments alongside relatively stable faculty employment indicates that degree production alone is insufficient to characterize workforce dynamics. In this study, we develop a discrete time compartmental model of the academic pipeline in the field of the mathematical sciences that links observed degree flows to latent population stocks. Undergraduate and graduate populations are reconstructed directly from nationally reported degree data, allowing postdoctoral and faculty dynamics to be examined under completion, exit, and hiring processes. Advancement to faculty positions is modeled as vacancy limited, with competition for permanent positions depending on downstream population size. Numerical simul
Hiring processes often involve the manual screening of hundreds of resumes for each job, a task that is time and effort consuming, error-prone, and subject to human bias. This paper presents Smart-Hiring, an end-to-end Natural Language Processing (NLP) pipeline de- signed to automatically extract structured information from unstructured resumes and to semantically match candidates with job descriptions. The proposed system combines document parsing, named-entity recognition, and contextual text embedding techniques to capture skills, experience, and qualifications. Using advanced NLP technics, Smart-Hiring encodes both resumes and job descriptions in a shared vector space to compute similarity scores between candidates and job postings. The pipeline is modular and explainable, allowing users to inspect extracted entities and matching rationales. Experiments were conducted on a real-world dataset of resumes and job descriptions spanning multiple professional domains, demonstrating the robustness and feasibility of the proposed approach. The system achieves competitive matching accuracy while preserving a high degree of interpretability and transparency in its decision process. This
This paper views hiring as a contextual bandit problem: to find the best workers over time, firms must balance exploitation (selecting from groups with proven track records) with exploration (selecting from under-represented groups to learn about quality). Yet modern hiring algorithms, based on supervised learning approaches, are designed solely for exploitation. Instead, we build a resume screening algorithm that values exploration by evaluating candidates according to their statistical upside potential. Using data from professional services recruiting within a Fortune 500 firm, we show that this approach improves the quality (as measured by eventual hiring rates) of candidates selected for an interview, while also increasing demographic diversity, relative to the firm's existing practices. The same is not true for traditional supervised learning based algorithms, which improve hiring rates but select far fewer Black and Hispanic applicants. Together, our results highlight the importance of incorporating exploration in developing decision-making algorithms that are potentially both more efficient and equitable.