Whose fairness? Structural concentration in AI bias research
Artificial intelligence increasingly mediates consequential decisions in healthcare, law, and public services, and the field has responded with an extensive methodology for measuring and mitigating bias. Yet the fairness definitions, benchmarks, and debiasing frameworks on which this methodology rests are treated as universal while being produced by a research community whose composition has never been characterized. We show that the AI bias research are structurally concentrated, and that this
Record details
Published: 6 July 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Bias & fairness · Regulation · Healthcare
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Constance Viehbeck
LSE Data Science Institute · 6 July 2026
Moral Safety in LLMs: Exposing Performative Compliance with Puzzled Cues
arXiv · 30 June 2026
Auditing Fairness-Privacy Trade-offs: Subpopulation-Level Effects of Fairness-Enhancing Algorithms
arXiv · 16 July 2026
AgentFairBench: Do LLM Agents Discriminate When They Act?
arXiv · 15 June 2026
A Computational Ethical Framework for Financial Digital Phenotyping for Mental Health
arXiv cs.CY · 28 July 2026
Bridging Geographic Bias in Urban Streetscape Inference via Lifelong Learning with Visual-Semantic Pivoting
arXiv · 13 June 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (6 July 2026), “Whose fairness? Structural concentration in AI bias research,” evidence record 184, https://ethics.ai/record/184 (originally published by arXiv).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.