How Supply Chain Dependencies Complicate Bias Measurement and Accountability Attribution in AI Hiring Applications

The increasing adoption of AI systems in hiring has raised concerns about algorithmic bias and accountability, prompting regulatory responses including the EU AI Act, NYC Local Law 144, and Colorado's AI Act. While existing research examines bias through technical or regulatory lenses, both perspectives overlook a fundamental challenge: modern AI hiring systems operate within complex supply chains where responsibility fragments across data vendors, model developers, platform providers, and deploying organizations. This paper investigates how these dependency chains complicate bias evaluation and accountability attribution. Drawing on literature review and regulatory analysis, we demonstrate that fragmented responsibilities create two critical problems. First, bias emerges from component interactions rather than isolated elements, yet proprietary configurations prevent integrated evaluation. A resume parser may function without bias independently but contribute to discrimination when integrated with specific ranking algorithms and filtering thresholds. Second, information asymmetries mean deploying organizations bear legal responsibility without technical visibility into vendor-supplied algorithms, while vendors control implementations without meaningful disclosure requirements. Each stakeholder may believe they are compliant; nevertheless, the integrated system may produce biased outcomes. Analysis of implementation ambiguities reveals these challenges in practice. We propose multi-layered interventions including system-level audits, vendor guidelines, continuous monitoring mechanisms, and documentation across dependency chains. Our findings reveal that effective governance requires coordinated action across technical, organizational, and regulatory domains to establish meaningful accountability in distributed development environments.

Unraveling the Interconnected Axes of Heterogeneity in Machine Learning for Democratic and Inclusive Advancements

The growing utilization of machine learning (ML) in decision-making processes raises questions about its benefits to society. In this study, we identify and analyze three axes of heterogeneity that significantly influence the trajectory of ML products. These axes are i) values, culture and regulations, ii) data composition, and iii) resource and infrastructure capacity. We demonstrate how these axes are interdependent and mutually influence one another, emphasizing the need to consider and address them jointly. Unfortunately, the current research landscape falls short in this regard, often failing to adopt a holistic approach. We examine the prevalent practices and methodologies that skew these axes in favor of a selected few, resulting in power concentration, homogenized control, and increased dependency. We discuss how this fragmented study of the three axes poses a significant challenge, leading to an impractical solution space that lacks reflection of real-world scenarios. Addressing these issues is crucial to ensure a more comprehensive understanding of the interconnected nature of society and to foster the democratic and inclusive development of ML systems that are more aligned with real-world complexities and its diverse requirements.