1

CAPSTONE PROJECT “Build

REPORT SUBMITTED TO
DR. VENKAT REDDY
WOXSEN UNIVERSITY
SUBMISSION DATE: 28/04/2023
TERM- 3
 2

DESIGN THINKING
“Building Fairness into Job Recommendation AI
Systems (JRS): A Design Thinking Approach”
Team -2 (A2, B2)

Sl.No Student Name Student Id

Team- A2
1 Bharat Sethia 22WU0202054
2 Tezovalli Bodhimisetty 22WU0202099
3 Shivani Prabhu 22WU0202113
4 Gauri Singh 22WU0202060
5 Deepthi Reddy 22WU0202068
6 H B Shradha 22WU0202100
Team-B2
1 Mugil Vijey 22WU0202189
2 Bishal Poddar 22WU0202129
3 Shreyansh Mathur 22WU0202147
4 Nirmalya Kundu 22WU0202131
5 Atrij Jadon 22WU0202125
6 Akashdeep Singh 22WU0202138

Building Fairness into Job Recommendation Ai
Systems (JRS): A Design Thinking Approach (2023)
First A. Author, Tezovalli Bodhimisetty, Second B. Bishal Poddar, Third C. Atrij Jadon, Fourth D.
Nirmalya Kundu, Fifth E. Shivani Prabhu, Sixth F. Mugil Vijey, Seventh G. Shreyansh, Eighth H.
Gauri Singh, Nineth I. Bharat Sethia, Tenth J. H B Shradha, Eleventh K. Akashdeep Singh, Twelth.
Deepthi Reddy, (Woxsen University).
Abstract - An example of a software program that
suggests job openings to job seekers based on their
qualifications, experience, and preferences is a job
recommendation system. By offering individualized
and pertinent job recommendations, these systems
hope to improve the job-search experience for both
job seekers and businesses. A major concern is that
recommendation systems may be biased and
discriminatory because artificial intelligence operates
on pre-established norms. A fair employment
suggestion system will be created using design
thinking as the technique. We created a working
prototype utilizing the blind-fairness approach, which
may be used to remove sensitive information that
might lead to bias. Fairness can be put into practice
by altering the system's algorithms. The approach has
its own limitations that it cannot remove all the biases
possible. Further research studies can be carried out
on additional modifications in the algorithm and the
job recommendation system to achieve complete
fairness.
Keywords: job recommendation system, Artificial
intelligence, bias, design thinking,
algorithms, fairness.
I. INTRODUCTION
The applicant pool is extremely large for human
resource (HR) departments. Artificial intelligence
(AI)-based algorithms are now a common tool for a
growing number of organizations to process
candidate data. The workload of the staff members
involved in recruiting can be lessened by the
deployment of AI-based algorithms. For instance,
an AI can assess applicant data and filter resumes
to lessen the volume of information that needs to be
reviewed manually. Following, we define AI-based
algorithms as "the cutting edge of computational
advancements that refers to human intelligence in
order to address ever-more-difficult design thinking
problems."
Second, since some applications are rejected by the
system, the employment judgements made by
algorithms directly impact the applicants.
3
Therefore, both human recruiters and candidates
call for an AI-based algorithm that treats every
candidate fairly. The former is concerned with
appearing fair, whilst the latter are worried about
being treated fairly. In this context, a tool is deemed
fair if it reliably predicts performance without
being affected by candidates' membership in a
minority group. Although fairness may not initially
come to mind when considering the problems with
contemporary AI-based algorithms because it is
widely believed that they are more objective than
their human counterparts, recent studies revealed
the opposite: they found disparities between men
and women in the algorithms' targeting of job
advertisements and gender bias in their search
algorithm.
Cognitive prejudices like the home bias,
resemblance bias, or stereotypes that lead recruiters
to favor certain applicants over others are
frequently the basis of unfairness. Because AIs rely
on data that retains the preconceptions and biases
of prior judgements, they are inherently unfair. An
AI largely picks up knowledge from observations,
but if those observations are tainted with
prejudices, the AI adopts that viewpoint. Biases in
data frequently relate to characteristics like sex,
ethnicity, or age that hurt specific groups or people
if an AI learns to favor them. It has been stated that
it is impossible to create generic fairness standards
for AI-based algorithms because they frequently
require human interaction and are incompatible
with one another. Therefore, we think it's even
more crucial to look for upstream and downstream
methods that can change an AI-based algorithm's
input or output and to provide guidance for people
using these algorithms to get better.
We set out to discover the most prevalent,
applicable, and fruitful strategies to improve
fairness in AI, motivated by the previously
mentioned issues of unfairness in recruiting
procedures brought on by AI-based algorithms.
Previous studies mostly concentrated on a

metalevel of fairness in AI, for example. An
overview of the technological options for
implementing fair AI-based recruiting algorithms
does not yet exist, but one is urgently required to
increase hiring fairness. Therefore, we declare the
following study hypothesis: Which strategies for
enhancing fairness in AI-based algorithms exist in
the literature about hiring and recruiting?
We conducted a thorough literature study with an
emphasis on features in AI classification and
ranking to answer this topic. By responding to this
query, we offer a summary of appropriate actions
about the investigated problem that can help
academics and professionals create intelligent apps
for HR. Additionally, the sociotechnical perspective
on algorithmic fairness incorporates our work. Our
research focuses on the technical sub-system that is
thought to be the "origin of discrimination" and
typically only produces conceptual outcomes.
Therefore, our contributions include (a) a study
plan for additional research to adequately address
the issue and (b) tactics for professionals who
create and produce AIs for hiring purposes.
A. Background and Motivation
It has become more difficult for users to digest
massive amounts of data and locate desired
information, products, and labor because of the
Internet's enormous expansion and quick
development. By prioritizing the transmission of
information and presenting each user with a
different list of new items that are tailored to her
interests and preferences, the personalized
recommender system, which was first presented in
the 1990s, is an effective tool for reducing the
problem of information overload. Online websites
and e-commerce services have effectively
implemented recommender systems on a large
scale. For instance, a client may come across a
page on Amazon called "Customers Who Bought
This Item Also Bought," which lists the items she is
probably going to find interesting.
Additionally, because so many people search for
jobs and apply for jobs online, internet job boards
may analyze the behaviours and actions of both job
seekers and employers which support the growth of
job recommendation systems collectively. Applying
the idea of personalized recommendation to the job
recruiting space, job recommender systems make
better suggestions for matches between job seekers
looking for opportunities and recruiters looking for
applicants online. Now suggest positions to the
employees that utilize their platforms. Algorithms
provide these personalized recommendations based
4
on a variety of factors, including the worker's traits,
past behaviors, and compatibility with the job's
needs. While job recommendation algorithms can
assist employees and businesses in finding better
matches more quickly, they have also raised serious
issues about fairness because, even if designers had
no intention of discriminating, the suggested
positions could perpetuate gender and other
stereotypes. For instance, gender may be linked to
job kinds and work styles in content-based
recommendation algorithms, which results in
gender segregation in job suggestions.
Additionally, item-based collaborative filtering
algorithms and algorithms that take into account
the previous behaviors of recruiting agents can
establish and maintain historical gender inequalities
in the suggestions that workers receive based on
job seekers' application behaviors’ order to
investigate the algorithm's "black box" of features
and determine whether algorithms lead to harmful
discrimination by using fictitious correspondence
in online platforms, a new research approach
known as an algorithm audit was recently
proposed. This approach is used in this paper to
determine whether, to what extent, and how job
board algorithms systematically treat male and
female job seekers differently. More specifically,
we made otherwise similar worker profiles for men
and women on the four most popular job sites in
China, and we watched to see which jobs were
suggested to those profiles. Then, we constructed
pairs of identical resumes that were qualified for
the positions, except for the applicant's gender. We
created two versions of each profile pair—a
"young" version and an "older" version—where the
older applicants have 10 more years of work
experience than the younger applicants because
Chinese employers' gender preferences appear to
interact strongly with the worker's age. My
imaginary workers then applied for the top
positions on the algorithms' recommendation lists
to observe how the algorithms altered their
rankings in response to the workers' application
behaviors. We compared the job suggestions
received by male and female applicants after
repeating this application process up to three times
(responding to each new batch of
recommendations). We discover that identical male
and female applicants do not always receive the
same job recommendations: on average, 12.3 jobs
were individually shown to male or female
applicants out of 100 job recommendations that my
candidates got. Younger employees, those in
gender-neutral job categories, and those in middle
and high-level positions were more likely to get

recommendations that were particular to their
gender. Importantly, since fictional individuals
began submitting job applications, gender
disparities in recommendations are even greater: In
the first round of applications, there is an 8.9%
overall difference between male and female
applicants; however, after three rounds of
applications, 19.2% of recommendations are
gender specific. Although job boards don't always
show the same jobs to our identical male and
female workers, it is especially worrying that the
computation randomness of the system is to blame
for the gender gap in job recommendations. To
address this issue, we compare the caliber of
exclusively male and exclusively female
employment in two stages.
First, we concentrate on the characteristics of the
jobs that are specific to each gender. We discover
that, on average, only jobs for men, which are seen
by men rather than women, posted wages that were
2,616. RMB higher than jobs recommended to
women, which equates to 1.8% of the average wage
of our fictitious workers. Jobs suggested only to
men require 0.17 more years of working experience
than exclusively-to-female jobs (7.5% of the
average requested working experience in
recommended positions), despite the gender
disparity in requested education being close to nil
in jobs recommended to male and female
candidates. In the second, we take words from job
descriptions that reflect six qualities of a job: skills,
work timing and location, benefits, company, other
qualifications and personality, age, and appearance,
and we estimate the relationship between the
word's appearance in the job description and the
gender of candidates who are hired. We discover
that administrative duties and literacy tasks are
more frequently cited in jobs that exclusively
employ women, whereas influencing qualities like
leadership and decision-making are more
frequently indicated in jobs that only employ men.
Contrarily, compared to males with the same
attributes, female applicants are advised to apply
for more jobs with flexible working hours and
regular breaks, whereas male applicants see more
positions that need night work and overtime. Only-
to-female jobs prioritize family-related benefits like
maternity leave and marriage leaves, whereas only-
to-male jobs prioritize higher performance
incentives like bonuses and company shares.
Except for the fact that orientation training is more
common in female-only positions and male-only
jobs are more likely to be in publicly traded
corporations, company-related words do not differ
5
significantly across male-only and female-only
occupations.
Gender-based disparities in job recommendations
are also reflected in the other needs listed in the job
descriptions. Words associated with a feminine
personality, such as patient and careful, are
frequently used in positions that are recommended
for women. These jobs also tend to include more
descriptions of the physique, temperament, and
facial attributes of ideal employees. Men are
advised to choose jobs that favor self-driven,
entrepreneurial workers. and can function under
strain. Additionally, the gendered words
summarized in earlier works in language, political
science, psychology, and labor economics are
consistent with the male and female words in
recommended jobs. We ran two surveys on Amazon
MTurk and on Chinese workers to get data on the
gendered views of words. We discovered that
occupations seen by female candidates tend to use
more feminine words, while those recommended to
men tend to use more masculine phrases. Finally,
we try to pinpoint the precise mechanisms causing
gender bias in employment suggestions. Because
words referring to gender-related personality traits
(e.g., patient in female, work under pressure in
male) and gender stereotypes in the workplace
(e.g., women are good at literacy skills, men have
leadership) occur differently in gender-specific
recommendations, content-based recommendations
that link gender with jobs' features must play a role.
Additionally, it appears that hiring representatives'
actions also lead to biased job recommendations.
The paired male and female applicants would
receive more varied job advertising in their
recommendations when more hiring agents
examine their profiles, demonstrating that human
bias may be preserved in and interact with
recommender systems. Finally, we discover that
item-based collaborative filtering, which suggests
jobs based on workers' application histories, may
reinforce, and amplify the gender bias in the system
by comparing occupations proposed before and
after workers apply for employment.
B) Research problem and objectives
The problem is Biasness in Job Recommendation
AI Systems (JRS).
Objective: To design a Job Recommendation AI
System (JRS) that eliminates biases and provides
equal opportunities to all job applicants regardless

of their race, gender, background, or any other
factors.
C) Overview of the paper structure
 Literature Review
 Definition and importance of
fairness in JRS
 Types of bias in JRS
 Existing approaches to address
bias in JRS
 JRS System Architecture
 Overview of a typical JRS system
architecture
 Identification of potential sources of
bias in the JRS system
 Methodology
 Design thinking process for developing
fair JRS.
 Data collection and analysis
 System design and implementation
 Results and Analysis
 Overview of the fair JRS prototype
 Evaluation of the fair JRS prototype
 Comparison of the fair JRS with existing
systems
 Discussion
 Interpretation of the results
 Implications of the fair JRS for processes
 Limitations and future research directions
 Conclusion
 Summary of the research findings
 Contributions and practical implications of
the study
 Recommendations for future development
of JRS.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
A) Definition of Fairness in Job
Recommendation System
When discussing the priority of fairness in job
recommendation system, the term "fairness" refers
back to the approach of making sure that the
suggestions provided with the useful resource of
the device do not unfairly benefit or downside any
precise set of job seekers based definitely at the
demographics or specific attributes they own. A
method that is simply and fair for supplying
candidates for process have to deal with all
6
applicants with fairness and supply every of them
an equal opportunity to be considered for the
vacancy. The system should not advocate toward
the job applicants based on unique additives
consisting of candidate’s age, candidate’s race,
candidate’s gender, candidate’s training level and
candidate’s paintings revel in. Rather, it should
address all of the procedure candidates in
analogous way irrespective of the criteria.
The job recommendation system ought to be
smooth, transparent, honest, open, and capable of
getting scrutinized by way of the auditors. As a
result of this, the candidates can recognize the
primary reasons at the back of why they were
nominated or why they have been no longer
nominated for a job position. Fairness in the job
recommendation system will also allow the
recognition and mitigation of all the biases, flaws
and prejudices that might be present inside the
recruitment system. A fair activity advice system
must contribute to the marketing of range, equity,
and inclusion inside the recruiting way. This may
be achieved through considering candidates for a
role based totally on their competencies,
credentials, and experience.
B) Importance of fairness in Job
Recommendation System
According to Al-Otaibi and Ykhlef (2012), study
on the subject of fairness in job recommendation is
a crucial one because it can be of use to both job
searchers and employers. Its responsibility is
making job suggestions to the possible applicants.
Making recommendations to job searchers is
fundamentally distinct from making
recommendations to customers for conventional
commodities such as films or music. When solving
classic recommendation issues, its far widespread
practice to count on that the numbers of objects to
be had are limitless. The expectation among
suppliers is that as many customers as viable will
advocate their products in an effort to boost
conversions and revenues. The system should
refrain from suggesting a specific job posting to an
excessive number of job seekers, however, in
relation to job recommendations.
A job advertisement will indicate the purpose to fill
one or many of the open positions from the
perspective of the organisation searching for to fill
it. As an end result of an immoderate variety of
candidates for a job opening, the workload
associated with analysing resumes and undertaking
interviews may additionally come to be being more
than expected. When looking for activity, a person
can typically receive one of the to be had job
offers. There may be fewer opportunities for human
beings searching for jobs to be recruited if there are

an excessive range of humans making use of for the
same job because of elevated competition.
Additionally, modern-day recommender systems
are primarily based on collaborative filtering. As an
end result, they suffer from issues related to
recognition bias (Abdollahpouri, Burke, and
Mobasher 2017, 2019). This method that famous
items will get more exposure than people who have
acquired much less interaction. In the case of job
recommendations, job providers might decide to
depart the advice platform in the event that they
consistently gain minimal visibility and acquire an
insufficient number of applications whilst their
posts end. This might make it even difficult for job
seekers to find satisfying process possibilities.
Therefore, it is also vital to guarantee that job posts
receive a good amount of exposure with a view to
promote the lengthy-time period improvement of
job recommendation systems.
As those systems have the capability to reinforce
and perpetuate prejudices that already exist in the
recruiting technique, it is far imperative that
procedure advice structures be truthful. Unfair
consequences, which incorporates discrimination in
opposition to unique businesses of people, along
with minorities and girls, can be the end result of
job recommendation systems that were not created
with fairness in thoughts from the start of the
design approach.
One could possibly get information about the
significance of fairness in job recommendation
systems from several viewpoints. Discrimination in
the direction of the candidates of interest need to no
longer be achieved based totally on their ethnicity,
faith, and gender by using manner of the
organization. Engaging in such behavior at some
stage in the hiring manner is likewise unethical. It
is unlawful to discriminate against job applicants
based totally on the characteristics listed above in
many countries.
Companies and job seekers alike stand to
advantage in phrases of fairness in job
recommendation systems. Employers can
accumulate advantages from a candidate pool. This
is constituted of a numerous form of those who
bring with them an entire lot of viewpoints and
ideas. Fair job recommendation systems can also
help job searchers from underrepresented groups
discover challenging possibilities that they
otherwise may not have been able to access. This
may be a sizeable gain to job seekers from the ones
companies who're actively looking for work. It is
possible to construct sincere job recommendation
systems with the aid of ensuring that they're created
to eliminate any possibilities of biases and to offer
identical variety of opportunities to all the method
applicants from numerous backgrounds. To make
7
certain fairness in job recommendation system, it's
massive to consider the factors which includes
capacity, training, and experience. Audits and
exams should be finished regularly to make sure
that the job recommendation device isn't biased,
and it may be further superior. To ensure that
corporations select candidates for vacant positions
primarily based on their abilities and abilities, in
preference to on variables beyond their manager,
process thought systems must be truthful.
C) Types of bias in Job Recommendation
System
i. Algorithmic Bias: It is possible for job
recommendation systems to exhibit
algorithmic bias if the system's
recommendations are weighted greater
heavily in want of particular groups of
individuals or occupations. This might also
occur for some of causes, which include
skewed schooling facts, skewed person
remarks, or the creators' own subjective
options when they advanced the device.
For example, if the training records of the task
advice system is biased towards certain industries
or professions, the system would advise the ones
professions greater often, even though if different
jobs are more appropriate for the applicant’s
interests and abilities. This takes place although the
applicant has a combination of interests and
capabilities that might be utilised in an exceptional
purposeful region. In the same way, if the set of
rules gets candidates’ feedback that is biased in the
direction of sure professions or classes of
vocations, this can additionally affect the
recommendations.
It is important to employ training data set et that is
various and representative in order to remove
algorithmic bias in job recommender structures. To
take a look at and decrease biases and to replace the
algorithms, it is far enormous to conduct regular
audits of the job recommendation system. To
reduce the feasible subjective biases, it is far
essential to encompass diverse stakeholders and
builders into job recommendation system’s layout
and testing ranges from the initial stages.
Additionally, candidates have to be properly
informed about the operation of the job
recommendation system and must be given a
chance to offer feedback for the improvement of
the system’s accuracy and mitigation of bias.
ii. Sampling Bias: A sampling bias could emerge in
job recommender systems if the records used
to educate the system is not representative of
the entire population or consumer base. This
has to bring about inaccurate outcomes for
job applicants. The system will not be able to

capture the entire range of abilities, hobbies,
and alternatives of the user community,
resulting in incorrect or prejudiced
recommendations. The job recommendation
system will not be capable of suggesting jobs
accurately for users from one-of-a-type
geographical areas or demographic
organizations if it is trained on facts from one
geography or demographic institution.
Due to this, the platform can also provide
recommendations which can be geared closer to
sure occupations or industries, which may not be
relevant to all clients. It is vital that at the same
time as training a job recommendation system, a
sample of data that is both diverse and
representative is used. This will assist in dealing
with sampling bias in the system. This reason can
be served with the loads of sources, which
encompass online process boards, client surveys,
and extraordinary resources. The job
recommendation system that is updated
periodically with smooth records this is big to
ensure that it offers particular effects and is
relatable over the years. In order to decide whether
the recommendations are erroneous, whether or
now not the suggestions are not misguided, it is
vital to examine the job recommender system
overall performance primarily based mostly on
diverse subgroups of job candidates.
To ensure that the system accurately captures the
skills, hobbies, and picks of the person community,
user testing and feedback sessions may be done
with numerous groups of users.
iii. Label bias: It occurs whilst the labels or
categories used to classify technique listings are
wrong or prejudiced, which in flip ends in biased
tips being sent to users. This can show up while the
approach used to categorise jobs is preceding or
discriminatory, or whilst the labels do not properly
mirror the real nature of the roles involved.
To deliver an example, If the job recommendation
system is based totally on job titles or categories
that are biased toward positive genders or racial
businesses, this may bring about biased
suggestions. Another instance could be if the
system specializes in hobby names or classes that
are prejudiced closer to high-quality ethnic
corporations. In a similar vein, if the job
recommendation system is out of date and does no
longer appropriately reflect the current state of the
project market, this may additionally result in
recommendations which are probably erroneous or
prejudiced.
It is crucial to appoint a varied and consultant
series of labels or categories to classify interest
advertisements so as to overcome the issue of label
8
bias that can occur indoors task advice algorithms.
Utilizing standardized procedure magnificence
structures which can be based on purpose standards
and are robotically up to date to reflect shifts inside
the exertions marketplace is one method for
carrying out this purpose. It is likewise essential to
hire labels that do not comprise any terminology
that is construed as discriminatory or biased, and
that accurately reflect the actual obligations of the
position.
Furthermore, labels ought to now not encompass
any terminology that may be construed as
discriminatory or biased and need to replicate the
actual responsibilities of a function because it need
to be. Performing ordinary tests of the job
recommendation system and making suitable
changes to the labels or classes, if wished, is
essential to dispose of mistakes or biases in the
recommendations. To ensure that the machine
correctly shows the needs and alternatives of the
customer populace, it is important to assess user
feedback and usage records and engage with
variety of groups.
iv. Feedback bias: When the machine gets feedback
from users that is biased or unrepresentative,
its consequences in recommendations which
might be defective or prejudiced. This can
also additionally arise even as particular
professions of candidates are extra willing to
offer feedback than others, or whilst the
feedback provided is not indicative of the job
candidates actual possibilities or pastimes.
Both of those situations have the capability to
reason the identical result.
To count on, if a sure demographic group or
industry is much more likely to provide feedback to
the job recommendation system than others, this
could motive tips which can be more favourable
within the route of the demographic organization or
industry. In a comparable vein, if the enter
furnished via way of applicants does now not
reflect the picks or pursuits that they in reality
have, this will also result in hints that are wrong or
prejudiced. It is crucial to accumulate comments
from a wide and consultant collection applicant as a
manner to combat the feedback bias that can stand
up in task advice structures. Additionally, it is far
critical to make sure that the remarks as it should
display the person's true possibilities and interests.
This can contain accumulating input from
numerous assets, together with customer surveys,
interviews, and utilization information, after which
making use of statistical strategies to assess the
comments and locate any biases.
It is likewise essential to emphasise to applicants
the significance of providing remarks that is every
accurate and representative, and it is equally vital
to facilitate the supply of remarks via applicants in
a manner that is every handy and effects to be had.

In addition, it is important to examine the overall
performance of the job recommendation system on
everyday basis and make any critical changes to the
algorithms which will accurate any inaccuracies or
biases that may be present in the suggestions.
v. Implicit Bias: Implicit Bias is the
unintentional incorporation of bias right
into a recommendation system due to
societal or cultural prejudices and
stereotypes. This form of bias can emerge
when a recommendation system is used.
If the algorithm assumes that guys are better
appropriate to positive kinds of jobs than ladies,
then its recommendations may additionally prefer
men. It is feasible to lessen the outcomes of
implicit bias in job advice structures by way of
reviewing and auditing their algorithms on
everyday basis. This will save you algorithms from
perpetuating stereotypes or with the exception of
sure businesses. It is vital to apply inclusive and
various records units when schooling algorithms, as
well as to encompass a wide organization of
stakeholders inside the layout and checking out
method. Additionally, to lessen the results of
implicit bias, Decision making system of the job
recommendation system needs to be as obvious as
viable.
C) Existing approaches to address bias in Job
Recommendation Systems
As a job recommendation system could boom the
stereotypes and biases which can be already current
inside the statistics that they are told upon, they
have the capacity to contribute to the prolongation
of bias in the job marketplace. Various techniques
have been contemplated, evolved, and put into
exercise as feasible solutions to the prejudice in
task advice systems. Below stated are strategies:
i. Recommendation with an emphasis on
diversity: This method places number one
emphasis on broadening participation of
underrepresented businesses inside the job
possibilities which can be suggested. It is
based on the concept that increasing the variety
of professions which might be advocated to
human beings can reduce the risk of bias being
perpetuated. One method for placing this
strategy into motion is to include diversity into
the recommendation set of regulations in a
more open manner.
ii. De-biasing algorithms: It includes techniques
that try to take away or get rid of bias from the
facts this is used to educate the
recommendation device. These algorithms are
9
also referred to as "de-biasing strategies."
Adjusting the burden given to inclinations or
capabilities which may be diagnosed to be
associated with prejudice is one way to
perform this cause. For instance, if the tool has
a choice for male applicants, the set of tips
may be changed to provide the algorithm can
be modified to give less weight to gender as an
interest in the concept. This may be completed
if the tool has this form of desire.
iii. Limitations on fairness: This strategy requires
which include fairness barriers into the
recommendation system. These boundaries may
be defined in several ways, including making
sure that the recommendations are scattered
pretty across the distinct businesses or ensuring
that the job recommendation system does not
give priority to someone of the groups over the
others.
iv. Human being in the loop: Human beings are
taken into consideration into the procedure of
creating technique tips in this method, that is
known as “person in the loop approach”. The
number one goal of this approach is to search
for bias and to clear up any biases or mistakes
that could were added. Either through asking
applicants for their input at the
recommendations or through hiring a fixed of
human reviewers this objective may be fulfilled.
v. Transparent and explainable algorithms: The
reason of this technique is to make the
recommendation system more open to scrutiny
by providing a proof of the cause at the return of
every recommendation this is generated. This
could assist applicants in comprehending why
they are being endorsed for numerous jobs, and
it could additionally be useful in recognising
and decreasing biases which are already present
inside the gadget.
These methods are not associated with each
different, they may be combined to offer answers
which is dependable and efficient to eliminate bias
in job recommendation systems.
III. JRS System Architecture
A. Overview of a typical JRS system
architecture
Since the early days of the internet's
commercialization in the late '80s, many have
wondered how it could be used to better match
potential employees with open positions.

Vega presented an employment matching
system that could "be consulted by Minitel,
using telephone number 3615 and selecting the
LM/EMPLOI service" before the advent of the
internet. In other words, users of a computer
terminal called Minitel1 could send text
messages over the phone line in the form of
search queries or their digital resume. The
service would employ a preset job taxonomy to
compare keywords from the query/resume to a
database of relevant job openings and provide
a list of matches.
Although more than 30 years have passed since this
initial contribution, the use of a fixed job taxonomy
to extract information from a resume, such as
"branch of industry" (industry) and "qualification"
(skill), using "(a) dictionary specialized in the
universe of employment", seems vaguely like
LinkedIn's query processing method which can be
queried using your mobile phone2. Naturally, this
oversimplifies the situation: Vega's 200 concurrent
Minitel connections could not support the world's
over 750 million LinkedIn users. Despite
significant advancements over the previous three
decades, the need to assist people in finding
employment is still a top priority.
In this work, we will survey research published on
JRS (job recommendation systems) between the
years 2011 and 2021. We'll look at the many
approaches used in these systems from multiple
angles, including temporal, ethical, and mutual.
The large class of hybrid recommender systems
utilized in this application domain will be
investigated, and the impact of data availability on
method selection and validation will be given
special attention.
Since the reciprocal and temporal nature of JRS are
rarely mentioned in the literature, our findings
imply that a more application-oriented perspective
would be beneficial. Even when authors do think
about fairness in the context of job recommender
systems, they typically conclude that merely
removing discriminatory elements from the data is
adequate. However, there has been significant
scholarly focus on fairness, especially in candidate
search engines, which has resulted in the
introduction of several criteria and techniques that
we think might be applied in the job recommender
area as well. According to the literature on
recommendation systems, deep language models
have also seen increased use in the field of
employment recommendations. Only one study has
looked at the question of how effectively JRS
results generalize across datasets, and it found that
10
error metrics may vary considerably among
datasets.
The following outline is for this paper. It also gives
a quick introduction to some of the datasets and
terminology that will be used throughout this paper,
as well as an explanation of the process through
which relevant material was gathered and selected.
Our findings are discussed and organizes the job
literature into the well-known taxonomy of
recommender systems while also dividing the
sizable class of hybrid contributions into
subclasses. Other topics, such as the impact of data
science competitions\, JRS validation, JRSs with a
temporal and/or reciprocal perspective, ethical
considerations in JRS, and contributions discussing
job search and recommendation on LinkedIn.
Despite the size of Freire and de Castro's
contribution, we find fault with the way they
categorize the various forms of employment
recommendation software. These are typically
categorized as either Content-based (CBR),
Collaborative (CF), Knowledge-based (KB), or
Hybrid (HRS) in the relevant literature. Given the
prevalence of hybrid approaches, however, we will
further differentiate between monolithic and
ensemble hybrid recommender systems and
subdivide the class of ensemble hybrids based on a
taxonomy proposed by. Different types of ensemble
hybrids, as well as the interpretation of monolithic
and ensemble hybrids.
In the context of JRS, content-based recommender
systems (CBRs) are models that rely solely on a
semantic similarity measure between the user
profile and the set of available openings to create a
recommendation. In other words, the semantic
similarity of job postings is utilized as a surrogate
to predict how relevant each opening is to the job
seeker. Unsupervised in CBRs, one generates
vector representations of the open position and the
user profile, whose dimensions may or may not be
readily interpretable. Bag of Words (BoW) with
TF-IDF weighting is popular among authors,
however Latent Dirichlet Allocation and the newer
word2vec are also employed. Curiously, CBR
contributions have stayed around the same over the
past decade, yet they also weren't among the best in
the RecSys competitions in 2016 and 2017.
The fact that "job seekers and recruiters do not
always speak the same language" is a significant
barrier to the widespread adoption of content based
JRS, as stated by Schmitt et al. Applicants and
employers may, therefore, refer to the same
occupations, knowledge, and abilities in different

ways. Therefore, a recruiter and a job candidate
may each describe the same entity using a distinct
vector representation. Unfortunately, this disparity
is frequently ignored in JRS that focuses on
content.
Collaborative filtering (CF) is a recommendation
method in which ratings of various products are
collected from various users and then used to make
further recommendations. This matrix is typically
populated with click behavior in the e-recruitment
context, as it is in the e-commerce setting.
However, if such interaction data is lacking, the
rating matrix can also be filled in using the
sequence of past job occupations. In the latter
scenario, jobs must be organized into distinct
groups before they can be used in a ratings matrix.
To keep things simple, we'll just call everything in
the rating matrix a "rating," even if it's not always a
numerical value.
Hybrid recommender systems integrate elements
from multiple models into a single algorithm. In
this case, we hope to divide these procedures into
more manageable subsets. Separate hybrid
recommender systems into those with a monolithic
architecture and those with an ensemble design to
accomplish this. The term "monolithic design" is
used to describe hybrid recommender systems
when it is not viable to isolate a single component,
modify the algorithm as needed, and then construct
suggestions based on that component alone. But
ensemble approaches do permit decomposing the
hybrid recommender system into at least two parts
that can be (individually) used in the
recommending process. That is to say, the ensemble
 Components Of a Job Recommendation
System:
11
may include models that are, taken individually,
rather simplistic.
Instead of defining "knowledge-based
recommender systems" as those whose overarching
goal is to "Give me recommendations based on my
explicit specifications of the kind of content
(attributes) I want," we'll stick with the definition
provided by Freire and de Castro: "[Recommender
systems] which rely on deep knowledge about the
product domain (job) to figure out the best items
(job vacancies) to recommend to a user" (or
"candidate"). Jobs and applicants are matched in
job recommender systems by first having their
profiles mapped to a job ontology (the knowledge
base).
To create job recommendations, it is usual practice
to first map out the ontology space, where the
overlap can be calculated using tools like the
Jaccard index. Although such ontologies may take
time to build, they have been put to good use in the
real world by companies like LinkedIn and
Textkernel. Improved suggestions can also be
achieved by encouraging users to fill out their
profiles by suggesting relevant skills from the
ontology. The gap between candidates' and
employers' job definitions can be bridged using a
common ontology to map job descriptions and
candidate profiles.
Improved suggestions can also be achieved by
encouraging users to fill out their profiles by
suggesting relevant skills from the ontology. The
gap between candidates' and employers' job
definitions can be bridged using a common
ontology to map job descriptions and candidate
profiles.
A typical job recommendation system includes the
following:

feedback
data ingestion
mechanism
Data storage user interface
Recommendation
data processing
engine
Fig. Components of JRS
 Data Ingestion:
The procedure of gathering, obtaining, and putting
data into a system that recommends jobs is known
as data intake. In this process, data is extracted
from numerous sources and transformed into a
format that the system can readily process. The
accuracy and efficiency of the job suggestion
system depend heavily on the quality of the data
ingested. Job postings, resumes, and user activity
logs are some sources for importing data.
The process of data integration is depicted in the
figure. This entails gathering information from
sources, such as job boards and employer websites,
or from profiles of job seekers and employers.
Extraction of the pertinent data from the data
sources comes after data collection. To do this, the
necessary data fields must be extracted utilizing
web scraping tools, APIs, or data extraction tools.
There could be mistakes, inconsistencies, or
missing values in the extracted data. This retrieved
data is filtered and processed to make sure it is
reliable, dependable, and in a format that the
recommendation system can easily accept. This
stage is very important because the accuracy and
efficiency of the recommendation system are
directly related to the quality of the data.
procedures including deleting duplicates, adding
missing numbers, and fixing errors are examples of
data cleaning procedures. The gathered data must
then be mapped to a common data model. This
12
integration
entails locating common fields among several data
sources and mapping them to a common structure.
The data may then be directly ingested into the
recommendation engine or loaded into a data lake
or warehouse. After that, the data is checked to
make sure it is true, full, and consistent. Data
quality concerns are found and fixed using
procedures including data profiling, data auditing,
and data verification.
Data ingestion is the process of collecting,
acquiring, and importing data into a job
recommendation system. Data must be gathered
from numerous sources and converted into a format
that the system can simply process. The accuracy
and efficacy of the job recommendation system
depend heavily on the quality of the data ingested.
Sources for importing data includes job postings,
job seeker profiles and user activity logs.
The fig. shows the process involved in data
integration. This involves collecting data from
sources which can be scraping data from job boards
and employer websites or collecting data from job
seekers and employer profiles. Extracting the
pertinent data from the data sources comes after the
data has been gathered. To accomplish this, it is
necessary to extract the necessary data fields
utilizing web scraping tools, APIs, or data
extraction tools. The extracted data may contain
errors, inconsistencies, or missing values. This

extracted data is filtered and processed to ensure it
is accurate, consistent, and in a format that can be
easily ingested into the recommendation system.
This step is crucial as the quality of the data
directly affects the accuracy and effectiveness of
the recommendation system. Data cleaning may
involve techniques such as removing duplicates,
filling in missing values, and correcting errors. The
next step is to map the extracted data to a common
data model. This involves identifying common
 Data Storage:
Data is often kept in a database or data warehouse
and used in a job suggestion system. The data that
the system utilizes to generate recommendations
may include details about job searchers, job
advertisements, businesses, and other pertinent data
points. Usually, the data is kept in a structured
manner that makes it simple to query and analysis.
Data about job seekers, for instance, can include
particulars like their location, education, talents,
and professional background. Information
regarding job advertisements may contain the
position's title, description, location, pay scale, and
necessary qualifications. Before being placed in the
database, the data is frequently cleansed and pre-
processed. This can involve activities like deleting
duplicate records, rearranging data in different
formats, and adding in missing data points. The job
recommendation system can employ a variety of
algorithms and approaches to analyze the data after
it has been saved to produce recommendations. For
instance, the system might provide personalized
recommendations based on a job seeker's abilities
and preferences by using machine learning
algorithms to find trends in the data. The databases
used for storing data in job recommendation system
are Relational databases (SQL databases), NoSQL
databases, Graph databases, and document-oriented
databases.
 Data Processing:
13
fields across different data sources and mapping
them to a standardized format. The mapped data is
then ingested into the job recommendation system.
This may involve loading the data into a data
warehouse or data lake, or directly ingesting it into
the recommendation engine. After that, the data is
checked to make sure it is true, full, and consistent.
Data quality concerns are found and fixed using
procedures including data profiling, data auditing,
and data verification.
Data is often handled in a job recommendation
system through a series of phases that include
cleansing, transformation, and analysis. The
purpose of data processing is to draw conclusions
and patterns from the data that may be applied to
provide job seekers with precise and pertinent
employment suggestions. Some typical processes in
the data processing process for a job
recommendation system are data gathering, data
cleaning, data transformation, data analysis, job
recommendation generation and performance
evaluation. Data gathering is to gather information
about job searchers, job posts, and businesses from
a variety of sources, including job boards, social
media, and online business communities. Since the
data which is obtained is frequently unclean,
erratic, and incomplete, we need to pre-process and
clean it. Duplicate data must be eliminated, missing
data must be handled, and errors must be fixed. It
could be essential to transform the data into a
format that is simpler to analyze after cleaning the
data. For instance, this can entail standardizing job
descriptions or transforming location information
into a standardized format. After the data has been
cleaned and processed, the system can begin to
examine the information using a variety of
algorithms and methods, including clustering,
classification, and regression. Finding patterns and
insights that can be utilized to generate suggestions
for jobs is the aim of data analysis. The job
recommendation system can produce job
recommendations for job seekers based on insights

and patterns discovered in the data. These
suggestions may consider a job seeker's abilities,
experience, geography, and other factors. The
recommendation system's performance is assessed
in the last phase using measures like recall,
precision, and F1-score. This feedback can then be
used by the system to hone and enhance its
recommendation algorithms.
 Recommendation Engine:
An essential part of a job recommendation system
that aids job searchers in locating acceptable
employment prospects is a recommendation engine.
A recommendation engine's goal is to use historical
data to find trends and anticipate which upcoming
job ads will be of interest to job seekers. In essence,
a recommendation engine analyses the data of job
seekers, including their background, training, and
14
skill sets, and pairs them with openings that most
closely match their profile. Several steps need to be
followed to construct a strong recommendation
engine for a job recommendation system. Data
must first be gathered and stored in a way that
makes it simple to access and analyze. Job seeker
profiles, job advertisements, job applications, and
other pertinent information should all be included
in this data. Data must be processed and analyzed
using a variety of algorithms and techniques after it
has been gathered. Collaborative filtering is one of
the methods that job recommendation systems
utilize the most frequently. To find trends in the
data, collaborative filtering examines job seeker
profiles and job ads. According to these patterns,
the approach suggests acceptable job posts to job
seekers and helps identify similar job seekers and
job postings.

Fig. data mining techniques in job recommendation system
Content-based filtering is another frequent method
used in recommendation engines. This approach
entails looking for trends and similarities in the
content of job advertisements and applicant
profiles. Based on the information in job seekers'
profiles, this technique assists in identifying job ads
that are likely to be of interest to job searchers.
Recommendation engines also employ machine
learning algorithms in addition to collaborative and
content-based filtering. Inferring from past data,
machine learning algorithms assist in forecasting
future job ads that are likely to be of interest to job
seekers. These algorithms are educated on data to
anticipate the preferences of job seekers based on
their previous actions. A job recommendation
system must, in general, have a recommendation
engine. Using information about a job seeker's
experience, education, and skill set, it helps match
them with appropriate job ads. An accurate forecast
of future job posts that are likely to be of interest to
15
job seekers can be made by a recommendation
engine by analyzing past data and utilizing a
variety of algorithms and methodologies.
 User Interface:
A job recommendation system's user interface
is essential since it serves as the main interface
for people to communicate with the system. A
user interface that is well-designed can
improve user experience, raise engagement,
and eventually result in better suggestions. A
dashboard or homepage serves as the user
interface for a job recommendation system and
presents relevant job posts based on the user's
preferences and profile. Filters for region, job
type, and industry are just a few examples of
how users can further narrow their search
parameters.

The user interface may offer users information on
the hiring process, corporate culture, and other
pertinent aspects regarding the job posting in
addition to job recommendations. A "thumbs up" or
"thumbs down" rating system or a comments area
are only two examples of user interface features
that enable people to comment on job
recommendations. This feedback system can help
future recommendations be more accurate. The
demands and preferences of the user should guide
the design of the user interface to make sure it is
simple to understand and use. To learn how users
engage with the system and pinpoint areas for
improvement, user research methods like surveys
or interviews may be used.
 FEEDBACK MECHANISM:
Based on a job seeker's abilities, experience,
preferences, and other pertinent criteria, a job
recommendation system is created to offer
personalized job recommendations. Any
recommendation system must have a mechanism
for feedback since it allows the system to develop
and refine its recommendations over time.
Feedback can take many different forms when used
in the context of a job recommendation system.
Explicit feedback is one type of feedback, in which
job searchers express their exact opinions regarding
the referrals they receive. For instance, job seekers
can comment on the job description itself or assess
 INTEGRATION:
16
the relevancy of a recommended position. They can
also say whether they have applied for a position
that was recommended. The job seeker's profile can
be improved using this feedback, and the
suggestions made by the system. Implicit feedback
is another type of feedback that is gleaned from job
seekers' online behavior. This can entail keeping
track of a job seeker's clicks, time spent on a job
ad, and applications. The information provided by
this kind of feedback can be used to improve future
recommendations by the recommendation system
and reveal the job seeker's interests.
A job recommendation system's feedback
mechanism often consists of a feedback loop, in
which the system iteratively improves its
suggestions in response to user feedback, which in
turn generates better feedback. The system may
continuously learn from and adjust to the tastes and
demands of the job seeker thanks to this feedback
loop. Making sure the feedback is both accurate
and representative is one of the challenges in
creating a feedback mechanism in a job
recommendation system. Action must be taken to
minimize any biases that may infiltrate into the
feedback process to ensure that the system delivers
fair and impartial recommendations. By leveraging
both explicit and implicit information, the system
may more fully understand the needs and
preferences of the job seeker, leading to better job
matching and more successful job placement.

A job recommendation system's integration,
which facilitates seamless data sharing and
communication across different system
components, is an essential component. To
guarantee that the job recommendation system
runs smoothly and provides accurate and
pertinent job recommendations to job seekers,
it is crucial to integrate various systems and
services. Integration of diverse data sources is
an important component of job suggestion
systems. A recommendation system for jobs
often uses information from numerous sources,
such as resumes, application histories, job ads,
and seeker profiles. The integration of various
data sources enables the job recommendation
system to obtain all the information required to
produce accurate job recommendations. The
incorporation of multiple algorithms and
machine learning models employed in the job
recommendation system is a crucial
component of integration. To produce useful
recommendations, these algorithms and
models must analyze the information provided
B) Identification of potential sources of
bias in the JRS system
1. Incomplete or inaccurate data: Biased or
insufficient data utilized to train the system can
result in inaccurate recommendations. A
system may be less effective at recommending
women or people of color for open positions if
it is trained on data that solely comprises men
17
by job seekers and by employers in job
advertisements. The integration of various
algorithms makes it possible for them to
cooperate easily and deliver precise
employment recommendations.
The job suggestion system's user interface is
also integrated. employment seekers receive
employment recommendations from the user
interface, which also enables them to submit
applications. Job seekers may simply navigate
and interact with the job suggestion system
thanks to the user interface's integration with
other system elements like the algorithms and
data sources. The external systems and
services that the job recommendation system
interacts with, such as job boards, applicant
tracking systems, and career websites, must
also be integrated. Integration with these
external systems guarantees that candidate
data and applications can be reliably processed
and tracked, and that job recommendations can
be effortlessly shared between platforms.
or people from a particular region. The use of
sizable and varied data collection in the
system's training can lessen the likelihood of
this happening. It is also important to
periodically analyze data to ensure it still
represents the intended audience accurately.
2. Biased training data: It is possible to adjust
the weight given to numerous factors in a
matching algorithm, such as a candidate's

education or work experience. If the algorithm is
set up to give more weight to characteristics that
are not necessarily predictive of job success, or
if it is not constructed to consider the individual
variances between candidates, this can lead to
inaccurate findings. To reduce this danger, we
need algorithms that can prioritize crucial
criteria while also accounting for each
applicant's specific set of abilities and
experiences. In addition, algorithms should be
reviewed on a regular basis to ensure that they
are being used fairly.
3. Lack of diversity in the training data: The
interface that job-seekers interact with can
introduce bias into the recommendation process
if it is not created with universal usability in
mind. It is possible that candidates who do not
understand English or who do not have access to
a particular type of technology will be given less
favorable suggestions because of the interface's
language or technical requirements. To lessen
this danger, interfaces should be made to be
usable by people of varying linguistic and
technological abilities. To further guarantee
universal usability, interfaces should be
evaluated with a wide range of end users.
4. Unbalanced class distribution in the training
data: The accuracy and thoroughness of the job
postings used to find qualified candidates:
Recommendations may be skewed if the job
descriptions are inaccurate or lack essential
information. This kind of discrimination against
women is possible. To mitigate this risk,
businesses must ensure that their advertised
positions are fully and accurately represented to
prospective employees. To reduce this danger,
employers should make sure that job postings
provide detailed and fair representations of what
is expected of applicants. In addition, job
descriptions need to be revised on a regular
basis to ensure objectivity.
5. Over-reliance on proxies: Use of information
that could be used to discriminate based on
legally protected traits; for instance, using
information about a person's zip code or level
of education could lead to discriminatory
suggestions based on their race or
socioeconomic status. To reduce the possibility
of discrimination, it is vital to avoid using any
data that could be linked to legally protected
traits in the selection process. In addition, it is
important to frequently assess the fairness of
using specific data points.
18
6. Lack of contextual information: Using data
obtained from untrusted sources raises the
possibility of producing inaccurate or
misleading suggestions. Candidates who do
not utilize social media or do not fit specific
personality characteristics may be
disadvantaged if the system uses social media
data to judge their personalities. To reduce this
danger, make sure that no slant is introduced
into the recommendation process by any
unreliable third-party data sources. Third-party
data sources should also be examined
frequently to ensure impartiality.
7. Lack of contextual information: Candidates
may be less inclined to trust or use the system
if they do not understand the process by which
recommendations are generated. In addition, it
can be harder to identify and correct causes of
bias if there is a lack of transparency in the
recommendation process. This threat can be
reduced by making the criteria for making
recommendations public and simple to
understand.
8. Limited data sources: Hiring managers may
make biased recommendations if they provide
feedback that is biased or impacted by their
own personal biases. For instance, if a hiring
manager has a personal bias against people
with a particular educational background, they
may suggest less favorably on candidates who
share that history. Training for hiring managers
to help them recognize and overcome their
own prejudices can help reduce this danger.
9. Algorithmic complexity: A lack of diversity
on the team tasked with building and
developing the system increases the likelihood
that vital details will be overlooked.
10. Overfitting: Biases in the system may go
undetected and continue to affect its
recommendations if it is not constantly
checked and assessed for fairness and efficacy.
Regular testing and evaluation of the system to
discover any biases and adapt the system
accordingly is essential for reducing this risk.
11. Unexplained algorithmic decisions: If the
hiring process is unfair or fails to consider
qualified applicants, the resulting
recommendations may be skewed. If a certain
credential is needed to apply for a position, for
instance, qualified applicants who lack that

credential but have otherwise equal experience
or skills may be overlooked. A fair and open
application process that considers all competent
applicants can help reduce this danger.
12. Lack of human oversight: The system may
perpetuate existing biases or miss new ones if
humans are not involved in the decision-making
process at all stages. Having human oversight of
the recommendation process to identify and
rectify any biases is crucial for reducing this
risk.
13. Lack of standardization in job requirements:
If the recommendation system were trained with
skewed data, the resulting recommendations
would be inaccurate. The system's ability to
recommend a wide variety of applicants may be
hindered, for instance, if the training data is
biased towards a particular demographic or
leaves out specific types of jobs. To reduce this
possibility, it is crucial to use training data that
accurately reflects the population of potential
employees.
14. Lack of standardization in candidate profiles:
Biased suggestions might result from the
system's overemphasis on narrow criteria, such
as a required degree or qualification, for a given
position. For example, if a job ad requires a
specific degree, the algorithm may ignore
applicants who do not hold that degree but do
have the necessary abilities and experience.
Reducing this risk can be accomplished through
the provision of recommendations based on
several characteristics, such as knowledge,
experience, and potential.
19
IV. METHODOLOGY
A) Design thinking process for developing
fair JRS.
The methodology involved in this study is
developing a design thinking approach. Design
thinking is a method of problem-solving that
centers the process around the user. To develop
creative solutions that satisfy user needs, it
entails iterative cycles of brainstorming,
prototyping, and testing. A typical design
thinking approach has seven steps as follows
empathize, define, ideate, prototype, test,
implement and monitor.
i. EMPATHIZE
The first step of design-thinking approach is
empathy. Design thinking is a human-centric
approach where problem solving is done by
keeping user as the main focus. Empathy plays a
crucial role in problem solving from user’s
perspective. Designers can comprehend the user's
issues and emotions by empathising with them.
This knowledge enables designers to develop
solutions that not only address the issue at hand but
also enhance user experience. Empathy is therefore
a key component in creating successful and user-
friendly designs.
In this study, we need to empathize with the user
who is a job applicant using a job recommendation
system like linked in, monster, career builder and
zip recruiter. This is to understand his emotions,
these emotions are represented as four categories
(think & feel, hear& see, does, says) and two
outcomes (pain and gain). These emotions are
represented in the form of map using the tool Miro
empathy map template.

Fig. Empathy Map: Empathizing with the user of Job Recommendation System.
MAP ANALYSIS
Think and feel:
 The user is frustrated that he couldn’t find the
right job. The jobs recommended by A.I.
software is irrelevant or out of context.
 The user feels that he needs to improve or
upgrade his skills to find the right job for him.
 The people come in with excitement for the
tailored specific jobs they require.
Says:
 Since the options are irrelevant, there is
confusion in choosing the right job.
 Due to irrelevant job recommendations, the
search process is tiring.
Does:
 Sends CVs directly to the HRs and the
companies.
 Stop searching for jobs online.
20
 Scared of the safety of the data which they are
uploading while applying for these job
recommendations.
Hear and See
 There are not too many choices in jobs
recommended by the A.I. algorithms.
 The A.I. algorithms give similar job
recommendations.
 The job recommendations from A.I. are not
always feasible and the recruiters don’t
respond to applications of these responses.
Pain:
 Unable to get the desired job because of this.
 There are too many fake recommendations.
Gain:
 This is a platform with many opportunities.
 It helps in finding a job that matches my skills.
 It increases networking.
By empathizing with the user of a job
recommendation system, I can say that, even

though the user is finding the platform useful with
ii. DEFINE
After empathizing with the user, we understand the
problem that need to be solved. In this stage we
define the problem statement, identify the key
stakeholders and also defining the user groups.
According to the literature review there are few
biases in job recommendation system and how
users are affected by those biases.
This define stage can be represented by using mind
map tool with the help of Miro templates. Based on
the research study the data is represented in the
mind map. It has four categories mentioned which
are types of bias, effects of bias, causes of bias and
key stakeholders. This mind map is used to
understand the problem and the people who are
affected by the problem, what are the causes for the
problems and how does it impact the users.
Fig. mind map of bias in job recommendation system.
iii. IDEATE
The design thinking process consists of many steps
in that ideate is one of them in that brainstorming is
one part that includes a huge group of consumers,
and experts in the field these need to be brought
forward for an exercise in brainstorming. Biasness
should not be there in AI JRS and for that methods
for generating ideas need to be developed such as 6
six hats. SCAMPER (substitute, combine, Adapt,
Modify, put to another use, Eliminate- Reverse)
whereas the third point considered the choice of
concepts in that ranking the concepts that have
been developed according to their survival,
attractiveness, and practicality. Lastly, opinions
need to be taken for the biases in the Job
Recommendation Systems (JRS) and in that all the
21
its advantages, he is not satisfied with the outcomes
of the recommendation system.
By analyzing the mind map, there are five biases
mostly found in JRS namely gender bias,
algorithmic bias, demographic bias, occupational
bias and availability bias. The causes for these
biases are found to be many but the major factors
are mentioned in the mind map. Pre-determined
algorithms, past-hiring patterns and stereotyping
are the main causes for biases in AI system. This is
because the algorithms are set by the given inputs
and pre-determined set of rules. Past hiring patterns
also have an impact as the data is stored and system
is set to perform according to historical data. The
proven effects of Bias in AI recommendation
system are irrelevant job suggestions, fake job
recommendations and lack of jobs with matching
requirements.
interested parties, especially the consumers, need to
make the changes to the models as a result.
From the Affinity map, the problem has been
identified as the Biasness in the Job
recommendation AI system (JRS), whereas the
source and reference material is Building Fairness
into Job Recommendation AI Systems (JRS): A
Design Thinking Approach.
Many alternative approaches have been derived
such as creating a fair and equitable algorithm,
incorporating transparency into the Job
recommendation system, communication can be
foster using trust, introducing human review and
oversight, utilizing open-source projects, and
investing in research and development, which can

also include fairness metrics lastly can go for the
user feedback.
The third step of the affinity diagram is group, in
this the different alternative approaches need to
combine, in that first group three alternatives have
been combined together that are create a fair and
equitable algorithm, incorporate transparency into
the JRS, and lastly the fairness metrics. Secondly,
they introduce human review and oversight, user
feedback, and lastly, they foster user trust through
communication all these have been combined
together. Lastly, utilizing open-source projects and
investing in research and development have been
combined together as one group of alternative
approaches.
The last step of the affinity diagram is idea
generation in Fairness is the one group under which
Fig. overview of description
22
many alternatives come such as transparency,
fairness metrics, and algorithm-based whereas user
feedback is another idea in which Human review
and improvement through communication are the
ideas and question is the problem in AI. After
analysis, it can be found that utilizing open sources
and investing in research and development can be
another ideate of the main question of Biasness AI
systems (JRS).
After all those grouping fairness and user feedback
can be the alternatives that can be prioritized.
 23

Fig. gather- affinity diagram

Fig. group- affinity diagram

 24

Fig define-affinity diagram.

Fig. Idea napkin

After brainstorming different ideas and solutions, implementing a blind-fairness approach. The above
Idea Napkin is used to select one solution that has map consists of the problem statement and what,
high probability of solving the problem. The How, where and when along with benefits of the
solution we chose is changing algorithms by solution. Target group is job seekers.
 25

iv. PROTOTYPE method where the user’s personal information

In design thinking approach the fourth step is
Prototype, followed by ideation step where few
approaches were mentioned which can remove the
bias in the recommendation system. Out of those
approaches the one we felt would be best fit to
create a fair recommendation system is Blind-
fairness approach. This approach is carried forward
to the prototype stage.
In this stage a systematic representation of
prototyping is done. The tool used for prototyping
is Miro prototype template. This template consists
of nine steps which are given as follows:
a. Tension: Tension is the first step in
prototyping. In this the problem and need to
solve the problem are mentioned. The problem
(tension) is Bias in Job recommendation
system. There is a need to develop a fair
recommendation system so that the users get
their desired outcome.
b. Prototype: A prototype is given based on our
analysis. The approach we prototyped is Blind-
fairness approach. Blind-fairness approach is a
like name, age, gender and ethnicity are
eliminated from the resumes while storing the
data and recommending to reduce bias. By
eliminating these factors that are responsible for
bias, fairness can be integrated into job
recommendation systems.
c. Actions: This step involves the actions to be
taken to start prototyping. There are six steps to
in developing a Blind-fairness approach. They
are data collection, data pre-processing, feature
engineering, model building and model
evaluation.
 Data collection- Collect data on past job
postings, resumes, and hiring decisions.
 Data pre-processing – the data collected is
now pre-processed by removing irrelevant
information, followed by converting text
into numerical data. From this numerical
data if any information that can lead to bias
is present then it is removed.
 Feature Engineering: Identify the relevant
features such as work experience,
education, and skills, and extract them from
the pre-processed data.

 Model Building: Build a machine learning d. Initiating (how can you start): First the data
model such as a decision tree, random sets are collected which contains information
forest, or neural network. These models about past job-postings, resumes and hiring
can predict which job candidates are most decisions. This step is followed by the other
suitable for a given job based on their steps mention under actions.
relevant features.
 Fairness Constraints: Introducing fairness
constraints during model training. These
fairness constraints ensure that the model
does not discriminate against certain
groups based on their protected attributes.
For example, statistical techniques can be
used like group fairness, individual
fairness, or equalized odds to ensure
fairness.
 Bias Mitigation: To mitigate the bias,
analyze the model's output for any biases
or discrimination against certain groups.
 Mitigate the biases by introducing
additional fairness constraints. If there are
additional fairness constraints that are not
present, certain features from the model
that are correlated with protected attributes
can be removed.
 Deployment: Deploy the job
recommendation system to recommend the
most suitable job candidates to recruiters
without disclosing their personal
information.

e. Ranking prototype: Here a rating is
given using a rise scale and it is
highlighted using yellow colour to
describe the rating. The constraints which
are rated are gender bias, occupational
bias and demographic bias. With the help
of this prototype gender bias and
demographic bias can be removed to a
maximum extend (completely if there are
no errors in developing), whereas
occupational bias is rated 2/5. This is
because if we remove occupational
database during the approach this would
result in inefficiency in showing job-
recommendations.
f. Contribution: In contribution, we can
describe how does this prototype contribute to
the problem. The blind- fairness approach
prototype mitigates the bias from the data
thereby those factors doesn’t create any bias.
This prototype can help users in giving
recommendations of their desired jobs.
Fig. prototype for fair job recommendation system
v. TEST
Testing is done for the prototype developed. In this
stage users are allowed to try this prototype. Based
on their experience with the developed
recommendation system, user feedbacks and
recommendations are collected. The solution is
validated and based on the results if there is any
need of adjustments and improvements, followed
by implementation.
26
g. Success: After implementing the blind-fairness
approach, success is achieved when user could
get recommendations without any
discriminations of gender, age, ethnicity or any
other factors causing bias. Then we can say the
prototype is a success.
h. Scaling impact: This is used go scale the
impact of the proposed prototype according to
user. This can be done after testing the
prototype. If this prototype is successful an
expected impact of 4/5 rating can be given.
i.Hypothesis: In hypothesis, we write our idea
statement and situation. The idea is
implementing fairness into job-recommendation
system. The situation can be deploying the
blind-fairness approach into small groups of job
applicants who are unable to get good job
recommendations due to bias.
B) DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data collection is done by taking focus- group
interviews with open-ended questions to
understand their experience while using a job
recommendation system like LinkedIn. The
respondents were asked questions on how well they
know, how frequently they use it, what are their
expectations, problems faced by them, how do they

rate the platform etc. All their responses gave an
understanding of their needs and expectations and
what problems need to be addressed. This
information will be useful in improving the
Fig. job-seeker journey map
Fig. job-seeker journey map (experience)
ANALYSIS
Understanding the issue and its primary causes
allows for the analysis of the user data. Using a
fishbone diagram, these causes and effects
(problem) are depicted. The components of a fish
bone diagram are problem, main causes of the
problem and the factors contributing for each
cause. Fish bone diagrams are also known as
Ishikawa diagrams and they are commonly used in
quality control and process improvement
initiatives. They provide a visual representation of
the factors that contribute to a problem, making it
easier to identify the root cause and develop
solutions.
Here the effect is the users are unable to find
desired jobs and the main causes of this effect are
biases. There are others causes also, but the major
causes were mentioned in the fish bone diagram.
These major biases are gender bias, demographic
bias, occupational bias, algorithmic bias,
behavioural bias and availability bias.
27
platform and making it more user-friendly. It will
also help in identifying the areas that need
improvement and prioritizing them accordingly.
In the above fish bone diagram, the rectangular
boxes represent the main causes and square boxes
represent the factors that are causing it. One of the
main causes is occupational bias which is having
limited with that limited data occupational bias is
also the problem narrowing job descriptions with
that Past hiring interns one which shared the
common cause i.e., the occupational bias and also
the availability bias. But availability bias is a main
cause which is having to overlook candidates with
different but equally valuable qualifications which
comes under availability bias and in that past hiring
patterns is the one which is having a common main
cause.
Demographic bias is another main cause which is
having to stereotype and lacks diversity in
development teams as the sub cause, in the middle
square box is the historical data bias and pre-
existing beliefs which is having both demographic
and behavioural as the main cause with that
anchoring to certain qualifications is the sub cause
of Behavioural bias.
 28

Usage of keywords that describes gender and
algorithms is the sub-cause of the main cause of
gender bias whereas in the middle-biased statistics,
the one which is sharing both the gender bias and
algorithmic bias as the main cause of even more
pre-determined rules is the one which is having
algorithmic bias as the main cause and all the
causes and sub causes ultimately causing the
problem Unable to find a desired job because of
bias.

Fig: fish bone diagram


In our study, based on focus group discussions we
collected data on user’s experience on the most
commonly used job recommendation system
(LinkedIn). Based on the inputs received a journey
map of a job-seeker is made
Customer Journey Map- LinkedIn
This map is used to represent user experience while
using the job recommendation platform. This
journey consists of stages related to job
recommendations only. The stages of the journey
are awareness, consideration, networking, job
search, retention and advocacy. For every stage
four parameters were mentioned which are
customer activities, customer goals, touch points
and experience.
Awareness: This is the first stage where the person
gets to know about the platform from a friend,
colleague or any online advertisement. The user’s
main goal is to learn how to use the platform.
Consideration: in this stage the user starts update
his profile by adding a profile picture, personal
details, educational background, skills,
certifications, projects etc. The user tries his best to
make his profile look appealing for the recruiters.
29
Networking: The user starts networking by adding
his friends, colleagues, professors and mutuals. The
user starts sharing posts on the platform and tries to
stay active and increase network. The main goal of
the user in this stage is to increase connections and
improve his reach to make his profile visible.
Job search: During job search the user starts
networking out of his circle. He tries to connect
with the recruiters and hiring managers. Some
might find relevant job as they wanted while some
doesn’t. The main goal of the user is to find a job
that meets his requirements.
Retention: if the job seekers finds jobs as he
wanted, he continues to use the app. If he doesn’t
get a deserved job recommendation even after
having skills and qualifications required, he
searches for other platforms to find the job that
matches his requirements.
Advocacy: based on the experience of the user, they
refer to others. Some people share their experiences
on social media while some give ratings. These
reviews, ratings and experiences shared can be
positive or negative.

C) SYSTEM DESIGN AND
IMPLEMENTATION
The suggested prototype- Blind-fairness approach
can be implemented in the job recommendation
systems to address the bias.
The system design involves the same architecture
as of a typical job recommendation system, but the
algorithms provided will be changed. It adjusts the
data storage and data cleaning procedures by
removing sensitive data. The updated algorithms
will also incorporate machine learning techniques
to enhance the accuracy of job recommendations
and ensure that the system is unbiased. This makes
sures that the overall user experience and increase
the chances of successful job recommendations.
Implementing a blind-fairness approach in job
recommendation systems involves considering
various factors such as the job seeker's
qualifications, skills, experience, preferences, and
the job requirements, as well as ensuring that there
is no bias or discrimination in the
recommendations. The steps to implement blind-
fairness are given as follows.
STEP-1: collection of data based on job seekers'
qualifications, skills, experience, preferences, past
job applications and also job requirements,
qualifications and skills required by employer.
group1 = data[data['age'] < 25]
group2 = data[(data['age'] >= 25) & (data['age'] <
45)]
group3 = data[data['age'] >= 45]
# Train recommendation algorithm for each group
# ...
# Adjust weights of features to ensure fairness
# ...
# Evaluate performance using metrics such as
accuracy and diversity
# ...
# Implement algorithm in recommendation system
# ...
STEP-5: Implementing a blind-fairness approach in
the system requires adjusting the algorithms that
30
STEP-2: collected data is cleaned and pre-
processed to remove any biases, inconsistencies, or
errors that may affect the recommendation process.
STEP-3: This is followed by removing the personal
data with sensitive attributes such as race, gender,
age, and religion are not used in the
recommendation process. It should be taken care
that the inputs must not contain these attributes
when used in the recommendation process.
STEP-4: an algorithm should be designed that
takes into account the job seeker's qualifications,
skills, experience, and preferences, as well as the
job requirements, to provide recommendations that
match the job seeker's profile. A blind fairness
approach, however, forbids the algorithm from
using any sensitive traits or other elements that can
possibly result in bias. Programming languages like
Python are used to modify the algorithm.
Sample code to implement blind-fairness approach
using python is given as follows
import pandas as pd
# Load data
data = pd.read_csv('data.csv')
# Remove sensitive features
data = data.drop(['race', 'gender'], axis=1)
# Split data into groups based on non-sensitive
features
can remove the sensitive features that are causing
bias. To adjust the algorithms, we need to use
programming languages like python and R-
programming. The code should be written in such a
way that it loads the data and removes the sensitive
content from the stored spaces.
STEP-6: After removing the data is evaluated using
performance metrics like accuracy, precision. F1
score, etc. Then the code is implemented in the
recommendation system.
V. RESULT AND ANALYSIS
A. OVERVIEW OF FAIR JRS PROTOTYPE:
The blind fairness technique for task
recommendation structures is an approach that
ambitions to make sure that the suggestions made
by way of the tool are impartial and sincere to all
customers no matter their private traits inclusive of

age, gender, race, or faith. This approach involves
Removing
demographic
facts
Using
impartial
requirements
Testing for
bias
 Removing demographic facts: The first step
is to remove any personal information data that
might probably find out the man or woman's
demographic group. This includes records
which incorporate name, gender, age, and
location.
 Using impartial requirements: The activity
recommendation system wants to use unbiased
standards to assess a candidate's suitability for
a task. This way avoiding any criteria that
could probably discriminate in competition to
positive corporations, which includes academic
qualifications which might be simplest
available to fine businesses.
 Testing for bias: The device needs to be tested
to make certain that it does not discriminate
toward any precise demographic institution.
This can be carried out by manner of reading
the suggestions made via using the machine
and identifying any patterns of bias.
 Mitigating bias: If bias is identified, steps
must be taken to mitigate it. This ought to
include changing the algorithms utilized by the
device or adjusting the standards used to assess
applicants.
31
several steps:
Ongoing
tracking
Mitigating
bias
 Ongoing tracking: The method
recommendation gadget must be typically
monitored to ensure that it remains trustworthy
and independent. This may additionally
moreover incorporate frequently trying out the
tool and adjusting as crucial.
Overall, the blind fairness method for interest
advice structures is aimed in the direction of
making sure that all customers have identical get
proper of entry to undertaking possibilities and that
the tool does no longer discriminate primarily
based totally on any private characteristics. By
following this technique, task recommendation
structures can assist in selling fairness and equality
in the place of work.
B) EVALUATION OF THE FAIR JRS
PROTOTYPE:
Job Recommendation Systems (JRS) are widely
used in recruitment and hiring approaches to assist
employers in figuring out suitable candidates for
open positions. However, there is a developing
subject that those systems may be situation to bias,
which could bring about unfair hiring practices. To
address this issue, researchers and developers have
proposed numerous techniques to assess and
mitigate bias in JRS. One such method is the blind
fairness method, which ambitions to get rid of the
unfairness in honest activity recommendation
structures.

The blind fairness technique is a framework that
seeks to obtain fairness in JRS by treating all
candidates similarly, regardless of their
demographic or personal traits. The approach is
based on the concept that bias in JRS is often
resulting from the presence of sensitive attributes
together with race, gender, or age within the
candidate's profile, which can influence the
gadget's hints. To put off the impact of these
sensitive attributes, the blind fairness technique
removes them from the candidate's profile before
feeding it into the JRS. This means that the device
does now not have access to any information the
candidate's demographic or non-public
characteristics and may only base its pointers on
objective qualifications and activity-associated
criteria.
The blind fairness technique consists of two
predominant ranges: pre-processing and evaluation.
In the pre-processing level, the candidate's profile
is analysed to identify any sensitive attributes
which can bias the JRS suggestions. These
attributes are then removed from the profile, and
the remaining information is fed into the JRS. The
objective of this stage is to make certain that the
JRS handiest considers activity-associated criteria
and qualifications, which include education, work
revel in, and abilities, in making recommendations.
In the evaluation level, the performance of the JRS
is measured the use of metrics that replicate the
system's capacity to provide fair suggestions. These
metrics consist of the overall accuracy of the
device, in addition to metrics that reflect its
performance with respect to special demographic
businesses. For instance, the device can be
evaluated primarily based on its capability to
provide guidelines which can be equally correct for
candidates of various races or genders.
To put in force the blind fairness approach, builders
can use numerous techniques, consisting of
statistics overlaying, feature selection, or
algorithmic changes. Data masking includes doing
away with sensitive attributes from the candidate's
profile, either by using deleting them or replacing
them with non-sensitive values. Feature choice
entails deciding on only the process-related features
which might be most applicable to the location
being filled, and apart from any capabilities that
can introduce bias. Algorithmic changes contain
enhancing the JRS set of rules to ensure that it does
not discriminate towards candidates based totally
on their sensitive attributes.
The blind fairness technique has numerous
advantages over other strategies for evaluating and
mitigating bias in JRS. One gain is that it is miles a
tremendously easy and simple approach that does
32
not require complex algorithms or vast quantities of
records. Another advantage is that it is an obvious
technique that can be without difficulty understood
and carried out by means of developers and users
alike. Finally, the blind fairness technique can help
to build consider and confidence in JRS among
applicants and employers, by using making sure
that the device is honest and independent.
In conclusion, the blind fairness technique is a
powerful method for eliminating bias in honest task
advice structures. By casting off sensitive attributes
from the candidate's profile, the technique
guarantees that the JRS most effective considers
activity-associated criteria and qualifications in
making guidelines, which could help to cast off
bias and promote fairness. Moreover, by means of
comparing the system's overall performance the use
of metrics that mirror its ability to provide truthful
suggestions, the method can help to build believe
and confidence in JRS amongst applicants and
employers alike.
C) COMPARE OF THE FAIR JRS WITH
EXISTING SYSTEMS
In the contemporary generation of automation and
AI, while such structures are swiftly being utilized
in many HR strategies, the advent of actual task
concept systems is an important trouble. The aim of
the studies is to design algorithms that are
doubtlessly free from bias and discrimination based
totally on elements like shade, gender, age, and
other private traits. There are several truthful ways
to suggest system prototypes already in lifestyles
that may be evaluated to determine their efficacy.
One such prototype is the AI Recruiter developed
through Plyometrics, an agency that employs AI
and neuroscience to assist companies make better
recruiting selections. The AI Recruiter uses
gamified exams to assess active possibilities'
cognitive, social, and emotional attributes and fit
them to relevant activity positions. The device is
supposed to be impartial and inclusive because it
excludes from the employment system any facts
that may deliver upward push to prejudice, together
with call, gender, and race. Instead, it places an
emphasis on methodically implemented abilities
and trends, matching applicants to the excellent
jobs in step with their individual strengths and
shortcomings.
Another example is the interest-matching set of
rules advanced with the aid of Textio, an employer
that makes use of AI to help corporations improve
their procedure descriptions and appeal to a huge
range of individuals. The collection of hints looks

at interesting descriptions for gender bias and
indicates adjustments to make them more inclusive
and interesting to a much broader variety of
applicants. Additionally, it monitors the language
utilized in process descriptions to anticipate which
phrases and terms would trap or deter candidates
from the usage of them. The gadget goals are to
lessen recruiting prejudice by means of drawing in
a greater number of candidates and increasing the
probabilities of matching them with suitable
method jobs.
The impartial resume screening tool developed by
way of Talvista, an enterprise that gives software
program software solutions for bias-free
employment, is a 3rd prototype. The tool uses AI to
study resumes and weed out any in my opinion
identifiable records, which includes name, deal
with, and photograph, which could result in
prejudice. Additionally, it fits people with healthy
positions by thoroughly evaluating resumes based
totally on interest-applicable requirements. The
device pursuits to decrease unconscious bias in
recruiting through except for any figuring out
statistics that would lead to prejudice and
specializing in procedure-applicable skills and
enjoy.
We can examine the prototypes and discover that
each has blessings and downsides. Based on all
applicant’s precise abilities and shortcomings, the
AI Recruiter powered by means of Pymetrics does
a terrific activity of connecting them with relevant
hobby positions. It is primarily based on gamified
tests, which won't be suitable for all applicants, and
there may be nevertheless a hazard of bias within
the choice of the cognitive, social, and emotional
tendencies which might be possibly measured.
By making hobby descriptions extra inclusive and
attractive to a much broader variety of humans,
Textio's assignment-matching set of rules is
powerful in drawing in a larger application pool.
However, it is not able to conquer ingrained
prejudices within the recruiting procedure, and
therefore leaves the issue of bias in applicant
selection unaddressed.
By getting rid of any personal facts that could
cause prejudice, Talvista's objective resume
screening tool is mainly useful in decreasing
unconscious bias while reviewing interest
programs. However, it no longer deals with biases
that can be gifted in the technique description or
selection procedure, therefore it may not be
successful in identifying the quality-wholesome
human beings for hobby positions.
33
In conclusion, no matter the truth that every of
those prototypes is a hit in reducing prejudice in
some factors of the recruiting manner, they do no
longer fully address the problem of bias in
recommendation systems. Combining the
advantages of those prototypes and addressing their
shortcomings are critical for the development of an
extra comprehensive and effective answer. This
may require creating a device that uses gamified
tests to rank process-applicable abilities and traits
while additionally casting off non-public records
that is probably used as a foundation for
discrimination. Additionally, it may contain the use
of be more to look at task descriptions for prejudice
and recommend changes with a purpose to lead
them to more inclusive and attractive to a larger
variety of candidates. Combining these strategies
will growth the dimensions of an open, inclusive,
and independent activity advising gadget.
VI. DISCUSSION
A) INTERPRETATION OF THE
RESULTS
It has been demonstrated in numerous other
recommendation systems that the strategy of hiding
the user's private information works. They employ
a blind-recruiting strategy in LinkedIn's
employment and recruitment process. With this
method, the hiring process will be more impartial
because recruiters won't be favoring any one
candidate over another and will only pay attention
to each applicant's skills and qualifications. It is
rarely utilized in job recommendation systems. The
users' experience may be enhanced, according to
our findings, if we use a blind-fairness strategy. A
recommendation for the desired employment might
be given to the job seekers based on their
qualifications and experience. As a result, a system
for employment recommendations might be
approached objectively. The recruiting process can
be made more inclusive and ensure that candidates
are judged entirely on their qualifications by
implementing a job recommendation system that
takes an unbiased approach. A more inclusive and
varied workforce may result from this.
B) IMPLICATIONS OF THE FAIR JRS
FOR PROCESSES
As an occupation suggestion structure, a blind-
fairness technique seeks to get rid of prejudices
caused by things like race, ethnic background, or
any additional protected traits. Such a strategy

emphasizes considering each applicant similarly,
despite their individual traits, and making sure that
the selection procedure depends solely on
factors relevant to the position.
Although a blind-fairness strategy seeks to lessen
prejudice, there are nonetheless several
considerations to consider:
1. Possible compromises - Efficacy and justice may
be compromised by the blind-fairness method. If
details like schooling, previous employment, or
talents linked with the position are unavailable, the
position suggestion process could grow less
successful at finding the most suitable applicant for
the position in question.
2. Integrity of Data - Equity of the employment
suggestion algorithm depends on the accuracy of
the information that is utilized. No of the method
employed, the algorithm's suggestions could be
incorrect if the information used is inaccurate,
skewed, or discriminating.
3. Transparency - A blind-fairness method can
make the hiring procedure more transparent,
thereby rendering it simpler to spot and correct any
possible prejudices. Applicants might be reassured
of their innocence being handled properly during
the hiring process as a result, which can also assist
to increase applicant confidence.
4. System Difficulty - The level of detail of the task
suggestion system may rise because of a blind-
fairness method, which makes it more difficult to
create, roll out, and administer.
In an employment suggestion structure, a blind-
fairness technique can help decrease bias and boost
openness. To prevent unintended repercussions, it
is crucial to strike an equilibrium between justice
and efficacy and make certain that the process is
built on reliable information.
C) LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE
RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
In job recommendation system the main role of the
blind fairness approach is to focus on removing
favoritism or any other type of bias based on one’s
caste, age, of male-female or any other type of
factor. This technique is practiced aiming at
treating each one equally, not keeping their
personal characteristics in mind, and the system is
totally based on profile or job-related. But this
approach also has some limitations:
1. Lack of information: The important
information is not considered like education
34
qualifications, work ex, or any additional skill
which is very important. This results in less
accuracy in the outcome, or it may give a less
relevant result.
2. undesired consequences: This approach
may lead to undesired results like producing
new biases. Take an example, if it ignores the
information about the educational background
of past work experience, this may advertently
disadvantage candidates from underprivileged
backgrounds who never had equal
opportunities or access to education or work
opportunities.
3. Insufficient data: there are some scenarios
where the data which is available may not be
sufficient or it may be biased, which makes it
difficult to imply in this approach. Insufficient
data can lead to a less efficient result and
decreases the ability.
4. Complex system: practicing this approach
in a job recommendation system may lead to
making it more difficult to use and this might
result in increased cost, and the amount of time
required may also increase and we cannot
forget the maintenance it may require.
5. Convenience: this can negatively affect
the experience, or the comfort user might get,
as candidates might get a feeling of not being
evaluated fairly, and the recommendation
might not be relevant.
Overall, this approach has some limitations
that must be kept in mind. This blind fairness
strategy can be proved helpful in creating an
equal platform by eliminating discrimination
and bringing fairness. But it is a big task to
balance and ensure that the entire process is
based on high-quality data to eliminate unseen
results.
VII. CONCLUSION
A. SUMMARY OF THE RESEARCH
FINDINGS
In this essay, we have looked at the job
recommender system (JRS) literature from a
variety of angles. These include the impact of
data science competitions, the impact of data
availability on the selection of methods and
validation, and ethical considerations in job
recommendation systems. To better understand
how these hybrid recommender systems differ,

we also branched out the broad class of hybrid
recommender systems. Previous assessments
of job recommender systems have not covered
this multi-perspective view or the new
taxonomy of hybrid job recommender systems.
Although early JRS contributions already
highlighted application-oriented challenges,
most of the literature still does not take these
into consideration. However, contributions that
do adopt various viewpoints on the JRS issue
do demonstrate that differing viewpoints can
be quite advantageous. These advantages can
include enhanced model performance
(temporal perspective), improved candidate
distribution across a collection of uniform
openings (reciprocal perspective), or
guaranteed algorithm fairness (ethical
perspective). The focus right now is on how to
develop job suggestions using the large
quantity of textual data from both candidate
profiles and open positions, where recently
notably deep representations have shown
encouraging results. This focus, though, could
give the impression that this is the only
relevant viewpoint. Such a singular viewpoint
has the potential to be quite detrimental,
particularly in terms of justice. Even though
we are not aware of algorithm audits on job
recommender systems, a review of Indeed,
CareerBuilder, and Monster's candidate search
engines did reveal significant findings for both
individual and group gender unfairness.
Algorithms and metrics that can be used to
gauge and guarantee algorithm fairness are,
however, made available by the increased
scientific attention to this issue. As a result,
there is an opportunity for researchers to
investigate how they may be applied to the
domain of job recommender systems.
B. CONTRIBUTIONS AND
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF
THE STUDY
Fair job recommendation system plays a major
role in job market. This system happens
because of algorithms to give shape to job
seekers and open activity positions. What we
look at in the job recommendation system is
fairness and unbiased and which gives equal
opportunity to all job seekers, without keeping
the age, gender, or other traits in mind. A lot of
studies have been done on its contribution and
attainable implementation and these studies are
substantial.
35
The biggest contribution of these studies on
this system is that it has improved the
strategies and has reduced the biases. These
biases can happen because of many reasons
like the language which is being used in the
task description. For example, a description
that uses words like “aggressive” or
“competitive” may deter girl applicants who
may interpret these phrases as masculine or
uncomfortable environment. Similarly, this
technique may also favor people based on their
location, age, and gender in place of their
qualifications.
To tackle this problem, many alternative
techniques have been introduced, one of them
is gender-neutral language in job descriptions,
casting off the location records from their
profiles, the usage of device gaining
knowledge of algorithms to perceive and do
away with bias within the recommendation
system. These things can really help to reduce
biases and improve the quality of the job
recommendation system.
An additional contribution of the study on this
system is the identity of the blessing of using
this system. Fairness in the recommendation
system can also help in reducing
discrimination in the job market and increase
inclusion in the job market.
Moreover, fairness in job recommendation
systems can also help by presenting a larger
and greater various pool of applicants to select
from. This can cause higher hiring decisions
and advanced organizational overall
performance. Using a fair process advice
system, employers can also increase their
popularity and emblem photos by
demonstrating their commitment to variety
and inclusivity.
C. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF
JRS
Some of the most common suggestions of the
research on fair job recommendation systems
are the development and implementation of
fair activity in the real world. Many agencies
have already started using fair process
recommendation systems to improve their
hiring process. For example, Amazon changed
its recruitment process in 2018 by removing
gender bias by setting new rules in the activity
tips as the previous method received a lot of

criticism. To eliminate discrimination and
growth variation in the workplace, other
companies, such as Pymetrics and Gap
jumpers, have developed process guidance
frameworks that leverage machine learning
techniques.
The adoption of an equitable framework for
employment suggestions does nevertheless
face some difficulties. One endeavor is the
need for extensive and varied datasets to teach
computers how to use techniques. The
collection of criteria will not be capable of
identifying and counteracting bias in the
advising device without a large dataset. A
further obligation is to continuously monitor
and evaluate the device to make sure it
maintains its objectivity and fairness. Despite
ongoing observation and evaluation,
discrimination may gradually return to the
system over time.
In closing, studies have shown that fair job
recommendation systems have substantially
boosted inclusion in the workplace and
decreased discrimination in the labor market.
These studies have aided in enhancing the
fairness and inclusiveness of activities
guidance frameworks by creating methods to
minimize prejudice, highlighting the
advantages of fair work guidance frameworks,
and providing beneficial consequences for
their use. Nevertheless, are still issues with
putting these processes into practice. To
address these issues and ensure that sincere
process suggestion structure continues study
and improvement is required.
VIII. REFERENCES
[1] Alder, G. S., & Gilbert, J. (2006). Achieving
Ethics and Fairness in Hiring: Going Beyond the
Law. Journal of Business Ethics 2006 68:4, 68(4),
449–464.
[2] Jack Bandy. Problematic machine behavior: A
systematic literature review of algorithm audits.
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer
Interaction, 5(CSCW1):1–34, 2021.
[3] Zeynep Batmaz, Ali Yurekli, Alper Bilge, and
Cihan Kaleli. A review on deep learning for
recommender systems: challenges and remedies.
Artificial Intelligence Review, 52(1):1–37, 2019.
36
[4] Berente, N.; Gu, B.; Recker, J.; Santhanam, R.
(2021). Managing Artifical Intelligence. MIS
Quarterly, 45(3), 1433--1450.
[5] Biswas, S., & Rajan, H. (2020). Do the machine
learning models on a crowd sourced platform
exhibit bias? An empirical study on model fairness.
ESEC/FSE 2020, 642–653.
[6] Shuqing Bian, Wayne Xin Zhao, Yang Song,
Tao Zhang, and Ji-Rong Wen. Domain adaptation
for person-job fit with transferable deep global
match network. In Proceedings of the 2019
Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural
Language Processing and the 9th International Joint
Conference on Natural Language Processing
(EMNLP-IJCNLP), pages 4810–4820, 2019.
[7] Shuqing Bian, Xu Chen, Wayne Xin Zhao, Kun
Zhou, Yupeng Hou, Yang Song, Tao Zhang, and Ji-
Rong Wen. Learning to match jobs with resumes
from sparse interaction data using multi-view co-
teaching network. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM
International Conference on Information &
Knowledge Management, pages 65–74, 2020.
[8] Black, J. S., & van Esch, P. (2020). AI-enabled
recruiting: What is it and how should a manager
use it? Business Horizons, 63(2), 215–226
[9] Booth, B. M., Hickman, L., Subburaj, S. K.,
Tay, L., Woo, S. E., & D’Mello, S. K. (2021). Bias
and Fairness in Multimodal Machine Learning: A
Case Study of Automated Video Interviews. ICMI
2021 - Proceedings of the 2021 International
Conference on Multimodal Interaction, 268–277.
[10] Alder, G. S., & Gilbert, J. (2006). Achieving
Ethics and Fairness in Hiring: Going Beyond the
Law. Journal of Business Ethics 2006 68:4, 68(4),
449–464.
[11] Bias in machine learning software: why? how?
what to do? Proceedings of the 29th ACM Joint
Meeting on European Software Engineering
Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of
Software Engineering, 429–440.
[12] Burke, I., Burke, R., & Kuljanin, G. (2021).
Fair candidate ranking with spatial partitioning:
Lessons from the SIOP ML competition.
Proceedings of the Workshop on Recommender
Systems for Human Resources.
[13] Le Chen, Ruijun Ma, Anikó Hannák, and
Christo Wilson. Investigating the impact of gender
on rank in resume search engines. In Proceedings
of the 2018 chi conference on human factors in
computing systems, pages 1–14, 2018.

[14] Dolata, M., Feuerriegel, S., & Schwabe, G.
(2022). A sociotechnical view of algorithmic
fairness. Information Systems Journal, 32(4), 754–
818.
[15] Consul, N., Strax, R., DeBenedectis, C. M., &
Kagetsu, N. J. (2021).
[16] Fernández-Martínez, C., & Fernández, A.
(2020). AI and recruiting software: Ethical and
legal implications. Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral
Robotics, 11(1), 199– 216.
[17] Goretzko, D., & Israel, L. S. F. (2022). Pitfalls
of Machine Learning-Based Personnel Selection:
Fairness, Transparency, and Data Quality.
[18] Yi-Chi Chou and Han-Yen Yu. Based on the
application of AI technology in resume analysis
and job recommendation. In 2020 IEEE
International Conference on Computational
Electromagnetics (ICCEM), pages 291–296. IEEE,
2020.
[19] Corné de Ruijt and Sandjai Bhulai. A
comparison of machine-learned survival models for
predicting tenure from unstructured resumes. 2021.
[20] Habous, A., & El Habib, N. (2021).
Combining Word Embeddings and Deep Neural
Networks for Job Offers and Resumes
Classification in IT Recruitment Domain.
International Journal of Advanced Computer
Science and Applications, 12(7), 651–658.
[21]
ELISE.WebsiteELISEJobMatchingSearchandMatc
hPlatform,2021.Retrievedfrom: https://www.wcc-
group.com/employment/products/elise-job-
matching-search-and-match-platform/,
accessedApril26,2021.
[22]
MauricioNorisFreireandLeandroNunesdeCastro.e-
Recruitmentrecommendersystems:asystematic
review.KnowledgeandInformationSystems,pages1–
20,2020.
[23]
SahinCemGeyik,StuartAmbler,andKrishnaramKent
hapadi.Fairness-awarerankinginsearch&
recommendationsystemswithapplicationtolinkedint
alentsearch.InProceedingsofthe25thACM
SIGKDDInternationalConferenceonKnowledgeDis
covery&DataMining,pages2221–2231,2019.
[24] Hardy, J. H., Tey, K. S., Cyrus-Lai, W.,
Martell, R. F., Olstad, A., & Uhlmann, E. L. (2022).
Bias in Context: Small Biases in Hiring
37
Evaluations Have Big Consequences. Journal of
Management, 48(3), 657–692.
[25]
AkshayGugnaniandHemantMisra.Implicitskillsextr
actionusingdocumentembeddinganditsuse
injobrecommendation.InProceedingsoftheAAAICo
nferenceonArtificialIntelligence,volume34,
pages13286–13293,2020.
[26] Ramezanzadehmoghadam, M., Chi, H., Jones,
E. L., & Chi, Z. (2021). Inherent Discriminability
of BERT Towards Racial Minority Associated
Data. In Computational Science and Its
Applications – ICCSA 2021. Springer International
Publishing.
[27] Hofeditz, L., Mirbabaie, M., Luther, A.,
Mauth, R., & Rentemeister, I. (2022). Ethics
Guidelines for Using AI-based Algorithms in
Recruiting: Learnings from a Systematic Literature
Review. HICSS, Maui, Hawaii.
[28]
ChengGuo,HongyuLu,ShaoyunShi,BinHao,BinLiu,
MinZhang,YiqunLiu,andShaopingMa.
[29] Boell, S. K., & Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. (2015).
On being ‘Systematic’ in Literature Reviews in IS.
Journal of Information Technology, 30(2), 161–
173.
[30]
FranciscoGutiérrez,SvenCharleer,RobinDeCroon,N
yiNyiHtun,GerdGoetschalckx,andKatrien
Verbert.Explainingandexploringjobrecommendatio
ns:auser-drivenapproachforinteractingwith
knowledge-
basedjobrecommendersystems.InProceedingsofthe1
3thACMConferenceonRecommenderSystems,page
s60–68,2019.
[31]
DietmarJannach,GabrieldeSouzaP.Moreira,andEve
nOldridge.Whyaredeeplearningmodelsnot
consistentlywinningrecommendersystemscompetiti
onsyet?apositionpaper.RecSysChallenge’20,
ProceedingsoftheRecommenderSystemsChallenge2
020,page44–49,2020.
[32] Kilbertus, N., Ball, P. J., Kusner, M. J., Weller,
A., & Silva, R. (2020). The Sensitivity of
Counterfactual Fairness to Unmeasured
Confounding. In R. P. Adams & V. Gogate (Eds.),
Proceedings of The 35th Uncertainty in Artificial
Intelligence Conference (Vol. 115, pp. 616– 626).
PMLR.

[33] Schoeffer, J., Kuehl, N., & Valera, I. (2021). A
Ranking Approach to Fair Classification. ACM
SIGCAS Conference on Computing and
Sustainable Societies (COMPASS), 115–125.
[34] Kappen, M., & Naber, M. (2021). Scientific
Reports, 11(1).
[35]MiaoJiang,YiFang,HuangmingXie,JikeChong,a
ndMengMeng.Userclickpredictionforpersonalizedj
obrecommendation.WorldWideWeb,22(1):325–
345,2019.
[36]
Kaggle.CareerbuilderJobRecommendationChalleng
e,2012.Retrievedfrom:
https://www.kaggle.com/c/job-
recommendation,accessedFebruary15,2021.
[37]
TanjaKoch,CharleneGerber,andJeremiasJ.DeKlerk.
Theimpactofsocialmediaonrecruitment:
Areyoulinkedin?
SAJournalofHumanResourceManagement,16(1),20
18.
[38] Lakkaraju, H., Kleinberg, J., Leskovec, J.,
Ludwig, J., & Mullainathan, S. (2017). The
Selective Labels Problem. Proceedings of the 23rd
ACM SIGKDD International Conference on
Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 275–284.
[39] Marks, P. (2022). Algorithmic hiring needs a
human face. Communications of the ACM, 65(3),
17–19.
[40] Leavy, S. (2018). Gender bias in artificial
intelligence. Proceedings of the 1st International
Workshop on Gender Equality in Software
Engineering, 14–16.
[41] Mayer, Anne-Sophie; Strich, Franz; and
Fiedler, M. (2020). Unintended Consequences of
Introducing AI Systems for Decision Making. MIS
Quaterly Executive, 19(4), 6.
[42] EmanuelLacic,MarkusReiter-
Haas,TomislavDuricic,ValentinSlawicek,andElisab
ethLex.Should weembed?
Astudyontheonlineperformanceofutilizingembeddin
gsforreal-
timejobrecommendations.InProceedingsofthe13thA
CMConferenceonRecommenderSystems,pages496
–500,2019.
[43]
SvenLaumer,FabianGubler,ChristianMaier,andTim
Weitzel.Jobseekers’acceptanceofjob
recommendersystems:Resultsofanempiricalstudy.In
38
Proceedingsofthe51stHawaiiInternational
ConferenceonSystemSciences,pages3914–
3923,2018.
[44] Mehrabi, N., Morstatter, F., Saxena, N.,
Lerman, K., & Galstyan, A. (2021). A Survey on
Bias and Fairness in Machine Learning. ACM
Computing Surveys, 54(6), 1– 35.
[45] Mehrotra, A., & Celis, L. E. (2021). Mitigating
bias in set selection with noisy protected attributes.
FAccT 2021, 237–248.
[46]
RanLe,WenpengHu,YangSong,TaoZhang,Dongyan
Zhao,andRuiYan.Towardseffectiveand
interpretableperson-
jobfitting.InProceedingsofthe28thACMInternationa
lConferenceonInformationandKnowledgeManagem
ent,pages1883–1892,2019.
[47] vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Riemer, K.,
Niehaves, B., Plattfaut, R., & Cleven, A. (2015).
Standing on the shoulders of giants: Challenges and
recommendations of literature search in
information systems research. Communications of
the Association for Information Systems, 37, 205–
224.
[48] Yeon-ChangLee,JiwonHong,andSang-
WookKim.Jobrecommendationinaskstory:experienc
es,
methods,andevaluation.InProceedingsofthe31stAnn
ualACMSymposiumonAppliedComputing,
pages780–786,2016.
[49] Mirbabaie, M., Brendel, A. B., & Hofeditz, L.
(2022). Ethics and AI in Information Systems
Research. Communication of the Association for
Information Systems, 50, 123–150.
[50] YujinLee,Yeon-
ChangLee,JiwonHong,andSang-
WookKim.Exploitingjobtransitionpatterns
foreffectivejobrecommendation.In2017IEEEInterna
tionalConferenceonSystems,Man,and
Cybernetics(SMC),pages2414–2419.IEEE,2017.
[51] Mirbabaie, M., Hofeditz, L., Frick, N. R. J., &
Stieglitz, S. (2021). Artificial intelligence in
hospitals: providing a status quo of ethical
considerations in academia to guide future
research. AI & SOCIETY, Published online.
[52]
VasilyLeksinandAndreyOstapets.Jobrecommendati
onbasedonfactorizationmachineandtopic
modelling.InRecSysChallenge’16:Proceedingsofthe
RecommenderSystemsChallenge,pages1–4. 2016.

[53] Nadeem, A., Marjanovic, O., & Abedin, B.
(2021). Gender Bias in AI: Implications for
Managerial Practices, 12896 LNCS, 259–270.
[54]
JianxunLian,FuzhengZhang,MinHou,HongweiWan
g,XingXie,andGuangzhongSun.Practical
lessonsforjobrecommendationsinthecold-
startscenario.InRecSysChallenge’17:Proceedingsof
theRecommenderSystemsChallenge2017,pages1–
6.2017.
[55]
LinkedIn.AboutLinkedIn,2021.Retrievedfrom:https
://about.linkedin.com,accessedMarch23, 2021.
[56] Raghavan, M., Barocas, S., Kleinberg, J., &
Levy, K. (2019). Mitigating Bias in Algorithmic
Employment Screening: Evaluating Claims and
Practices. SSRN Electronic Journal.
[57]
KuanLiu,XingShi,AnoopKumar,LinhongZhu,andPr
emNatarajan.Temporallearningand
sequencemodelingforajobrecommendersystem.InR
ecSysChallenge’16:ProceedingsoftheRecommender
SystemsChallenge,pages1–4.2016.
[58] Pessach, D., & Shmueli, E. (2022). A Review
on Fairness in Machine Learning. ACM Computing
Surveys, 55(3), 1– 44.
[59] Suresh, H., & Guttag, J. (2021). A Framework
for Understanding Sources of Harm throughout the
Machine Learning Life Cycle. Equity and Access in
Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization, 1–9.
[60]
MalteLudewig,MichaelJugovac,andDietmarJannac
h.Alight-
weightapproachtorecipientdeterminationwhenreco
mmendingnewitems.InRecSysChallenge’17:Procee
dingsoftheRecommender
SystemsChallenge2017,pages1–6.2017.
[61] Teodorescu, M. H. M., Morse, L., Awwad, Y.,
& Kane, G. C. (2021). Failures of fairness in
automation require a deeper understanding of
human–ml augmentation. MIS Quarterly:
Management Information Systems, 45(3), 1483–
1499.
[62] Teodorescu, M., Morse, L., Awwad, Y., &
Kane, G. (2021). Failures of Fairness in
Automation Require a Deeper Understanding of
Human-ML Augmentation. MIS Quarterly, 45(3),
1483–1500.
39
[63]
YongLuo,HuaizhengZhang,YonggangWen,andXin
wenZhang.Resumegan:Anoptimizeddeep
representationlearningframeworkfortalent-
jobfitviaadversariallearning.InProceedingsofthe28t
h
ACMInternationalConferenceonInformationandKn
owledgeManagement,pages1101–1110,2019.’
[64] Wolgast, S., Bäckström, M., & Björklund, F.
(2017). Tools for fairness: Increased structure in the
selection process reduces discrimination. PLOS
ONE, 12(12), e0189512.
[65] SonuKMishraandManojReddy.Abottom-
upapproachtojobrecommendationsystem.InRecSys
Challenge’16:ProceedingsoftheRecommenderSyste
msChallenge,pages1–4.2016.
[66]
SaketMaheshwaryandHemantMisra.Matchingresu
mestojobsviadeepsiamesenetwork.In
CompanionProceedingsoftheTheWebConference20
18,pages87–88,2018.
[67] JorgeMartinez-
Gil,AlejandraLorenaPaoletti,andMarioPichler.Anov
elapproachforlearninghow
toautomaticallymatchjoboffersandcandidateprofiles
.InformationSystemsFrontiers,pages1–10, 2019.
[68] Zhang, N., & Zhang, N. (2018).
Understanding the Roles of Challenge Security
Demands , Psychological Resources in Information
Security Policy Noncompliance. Pacis 2018.
[69]
MotebangDanielMpelaandTranosZuva.Amobilepro
ximityjobemploymentrecommendersystem.
In2020InternationalConferenceonArtificialIntellige
nce,BigData,ComputingandDataCommunicationSy
stems(icABCD),pages1–6.IEEE,2020.
[70] Langer, M., K¨onig, C. J., & Papathanasiou,
M. (2019). Highly automated job interviews:
Acceptance under the influence of stakes.
International Journal of Selection and Assessment,
27(3), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12246
[71]
AmberNigam,AakashRoy,HartaranSingh,andHarsi
mranWaila.Jobrecommendationthrough
progressionofjobselection.In2019IEEE6thInternatio
nalConferenceonCloudComputingand
IntelligenceSystems(CCIS),pages212–
216.IEEE,2019.
[72] Saman Shishehchi and Seyed Yashar
Banihashem. Jrdp: a job recommender system

based on ontology for disabled people.
International Journal of Technology and Human
Interaction (IJTHI), 15(1):85–99, 2019.
[73] textkernel. Website Textkernel, 2021.
Retrieved from: https://www.textkernel.com,
accessed March
15, 2021.
[74] Abeer Zaroor, Mohammed Maree, and Muath
Sabha. A hybrid approach to conceptual
classification
and ranking of resumes and their corresponding job
posts. In International Conference on Intelligent
Decision Technologies, pages 107–119. Springer,
2017.
[75] Acikgoz, Y., Davison, K. H., Compagnone,
M., & Laske, M. (2020). Justice perceptions of
artificial intelligence in selection. International
Journal of Selection and Assessment, 28 (4), 399–
416. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12306.
[76] Chenrui Zhang and Xueqi Cheng. An
ensemble method for job recommender systems. In
RecSys
Challenge ’16: Proceedings of the Recommender
Systems Challenge, pages 1–4. 2016.
[77] Blacksmith, N., Willford, J. C., & Behrend, T.
S. (2016). Technology in the employment
interview: A meta-analysis and future research
agenda. Personnel Assessment and Decisions, 2(1),
12–20. https://doi.org/10.25035/pad.2016.002
[78] Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Ahmetoglu, G.
(2016). The pros and cons of robot managers.
Harvard Business Review, 2016(12).
https://hbr.org/2016/12/the-pros-and-cons-of-robot-
managers.
[79] Alice Zheng and Amanda Casari. Feature
engineering for machine learning: principles and
techniques
for data scientists. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2018.
[80] Derous, E., & Ryan, A. M. (2018). When your
resume is (not) turning you down: Modelling ethnic
bias in resume screening.
[81] Stone, D. L., Deadrick, D. L., Lukaszewski, K.
M., & Johnson, R. (2015). The influence of
technology on the future of human resource
management. Human Resource Management
Review, 25(2), 216–231.
40
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.01.002,
2015/06/01/.
[82] Person-job fit: Adapting the right talent for the
right job with joint representation learning. ACM
Transactions on Management Information Systems
(TMIS), 9(3):1–17, 2018.
[83] Ferr`as-Hern´andez, X. (2018). The future of
management in a world of electronic brains.
Journal of Management Inquiry, 27(2), 260–263.
https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1056492617724973
[84] Dávid Zibriczky. A combination of simple
models by forward predictor selection for job
recommendation. In RecSys Challenge ’16:
Proceedings of the Recommender Systems
Challenge, pages 1–4. 2016.
[85] Vedapradha, R., Hariharan, R., & Shivakami,
R. (2019). Artificial intelligence: A technological
prototype in recruitment. Journal of Service
Science and Management, 12 (03),382–
390.10.4236/jssm.2019.123026 .
[90] Herath, H. M. K. K. M. B., & Mittal, M.
(2022). Adoption of artificial intelligence in smart
cities: A comprehensive review. International
Journal of Information Management Data Insights,
2 (1), Article 100076. 10.1016/j.jjimei.2022.100076
.
[91] Koch, J., Plattfaut, R., & Kregel, I. (2021).
Looking for talent in times of Crisis – The impact
of the Covid-19 pandemic on public sector job
openings. Inter-national Journal of Information
Management Data Insights, 1 (2), Article 100014.
10.1016/j.jjimei.2021.100014.
[92] Phan, T.T., Pham, V.Q., Nguyen, H.D., Huynh,
A.T., Tran, D.A., & Pham, V.T. (2021).Ontology-
based resume searching system for job applicants
in information technology,
[93] Ponnaboyina, R., Makala, R., & Venkateswara
Reddy, E. (2022). Smart recruitment sys-tem using
deep learning with natural language processing. In
Intelligent systems and sustainable computing (pp.
647–655). Springer .
[94] Singh, A., & Shaurya, A. (2021). Impact of
artificial intelligence on HR prac-tices in the UAE.
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications,
8 (312). 10.1057/s41599-021-00995-4 Sinha, A. K.,
Akhtar, A. K., & Kumar,
[95] Zeebaree, S. R. M., Shukur, H. M., & Hussan,
B. K. (2019). Human resource management
systems for enterprise organizations: A review.

Periodicals of Engineering and Natural Sciences, 7
(2), 660–669 .
[96] Suen, H.-Y., Chen, M. Y.-C., & Lu, S.-H.
(2019). Does the use of synchrony and artificial
intelligence in video interviews affect interview
ratings and applicant attitudes?
[97] Schmidt, J. A., Chapman, D. S., & Jones, D.
A. (2014). Does emphasizing different types of
person–environment fit in online job ads influence
application behavior and applicant quality?
Evidence from a field experiment. Journal of
Business and Psychology, 30(2), 267–282.
[98] What do consistency and personableness in the
interview signal to applicants? Investigating
indirect effects on organizational attractiveness
through symbolic organizational attributes. Journal
of Business and Psychology, 34(5), 671–684.
https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10869-018-9600-7
[99] Howardson, G. N., & Behrend, T. S. (2014).
Using the Internet to recruit employees: Comparing
the effects of usability expectations and objective
technological characteristics on Internet
recruitment outcomes.
[100] Measuring procedural justice in police-
citizen encounters. Justice Quarterly, 32(5), 845–
871. https://doi.org/
10.1080/07418825.2013.845677
[101] Shalaby, Walid, AlAila, BahaaEddin,
Korayem, Mohammed. 2017. Help me find a job:
graph-based approach for job recommendation at
scale, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Big
Data, 978-1-5386-2715-0/17/$31.00 c 2017 IEEE.
[102] Elshawi, R., Wahab, A., Barnawi, A., et al.,
2021. DLBench: A comprehensive experimental
evaluation of deep learning frameworks. Cluster
Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-021-
03240-4.
[103] Jan, B., Farman, H., Khan, M., Imran, M.,
Islam, I. U., Ahmad, A., Ali, S., Jeon, G. 2019.
Deep learning in big data analytics: A comparative
study, Comput. Electr. Eng.,75, pp. 275–287,
[Online]. Available:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0
045790617315835.
[104] Yao Lu, Sandy El Helou, and Denis Gillet. A
recommender system for job seeking and recruiting
website. In Proceedings of the 22nd International
41
Conference on World Wide Web, pages 963–966,
2013.
[105] Emmanuel Malherbe, Mamadou Diaby,
Mario Cataldi, Emmanuel Viennet, and Marie-
Aude Aufaure. Field selection for job
categorization and recommendation to social
network users. In 2014 IEEE/ACM International
Conference on Advances in Social Networks
Analysis and Mining (ASONAM 2014), pages
588–595. IEEE, 2014.
Marc Poch, Núria Bel Rafecas, Sergio Espeja, and
Felipe Navio. Ranking job offers for candidates:
learning hidden knowledge from big data. In
Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference
on
Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2014).
ACL (Association for Computational Linguistics),
2014.
IX. APPENDICES
A) ADDITIONAL DETAILS ON THE
METHODOLOGY, DATA, AND
SYSTEM DESIGN.
A Job recommendation system is an intelligent
system that uses data analysis and device mastering
algorithms to signify applicable job opportunities to
process seekers primarily based on their
competencies, enjoy, and preferences. The machine
collects facts from numerous sources consisting of
resumes, process descriptions, and candidate
profiles, and uses these statistics to healthy
candidates with activity opportunities. In this text,
we can talk about the methodology, data, and
system design of a process recommendation gadget
in element.
Methodology:
The technique of a process advice gadget usually
involves the subsequent steps:
1. Data Collection: The gadget collects
records from numerous resources
including task boards, social media
platforms, and agency web sites.
2. Data Cleaning: The amassed statistics is
cleaned to do away with duplicates, beside
the point facts, and mistakes.
 42

3. Data Integration: The information from
diverse resources is integrated and
converted into a fashionable layout.
4. Data Analysis: The gadget uses statistical
evaluation techniques along with
clustering and typing to perceive patterns
and relationships within the information.
5. Machine Learning: The machine uses
machine studying algorithms such as
collaborative filtering and content
material-based filtering to suit process
seekers with task opportunities.
6. Model Evaluation: The overall
performance of the machine is evaluated
on the usage of metrics including
accuracy, precision, and recall.
Data:
The statistics utilized in a job recommendation
machine typically includes the following:
1. Candidate Profiles: The gadget collects
facts on the candidate's skills, enjoyment,
education, and region.
2. Job Descriptions: The device collects data
on task descriptions, along with activity
titles, job requirements, and activity
responsibilities.
3. User Behavior: The device collects
statistics on consumer conduct together
with clicks, likes, and searches.
4. Company Profiles: The machine collects
records on corporation profiles, consisting
of corporation size, enterprise, and
location.
5.Machine Learning: The system makes use of
machine getting to know algorithms including
collaborative filtering and content cloth-based
totally filtering to healthy assignment seekers with
system possibilities.
6.User Interface: The machine provides a consumer
interface for task seekers to look and observe for
jobs.
7.Performance Metrics: The device measures
average overall performance metrics which include
accuracy, precision, and endure in mind to evaluate
the effectiveness of the tool.In conclusion, a
process advice gadget is an effective device for
matching process seekers with process possibilities.
In end, a job recommendation system is a powerful
tool for matching process seekers with job
possibilities. The method of the system involves
facts collection, cleaning, integration, analysis,
machine mastering, and model assessment. The
records used within the device include candidate
profiles, process descriptions, user behavior, and
agency profiles. The system design consists of
information collection, garage, cleaning and
integration, information evaluation, system
learning, consumer interface, and overall
performance metrics.

System Design:

The device design of a pastime recommendation

device usually consists of the subsequent additives:

1.Data Collection: The device collects statistics

from several sources in conjunction with process
boards, social media systems, and organisation
internet sites.

2.Data Storage: The amassed information is saved

in a database or statistics warehouse.

3.Data Cleaning and Integration: The facts are

wiped clean and included into a preferred format.

4.Data Analysis: The device uses records

assessment techniques including clustering and
class to perceive patterns and relationships inside
the information.