eventSeminar
Khaoula Chehbouni | Best Practices for the Use of LLMs as Judges
SeminarNov 13, 20261:00 PM - 2:15 PM
November
13
2026
An AI Measurement Science (AIMS) Seminar Series
Event
An AI Measurement Science (AIMS) Seminar Series
Get the latest news, advances in research, policy work, and education program updates from HAI in your inbox weekly.
Sign Up For Latest News
An AI Measurement Science (AIMS) Seminar Series
An AI Measurement Science (AIMS) Seminar Series
Phil Lewis from the National Center for O*NET Development will talk about data infrastructure the US Department of Labor provides, and how AI is used to update it. A panel with Diyi Yang from the Stanford Computer Science Department and DEL’s Erik Brynjolfsson will discuss the opportunities of a new partnership between Stanford and the National Center for O*NET Development.
Phil Lewis from the National Center for O*NET Development will talk about data infrastructure the US Department of Labor provides, and how AI is used to update it. A panel with Diyi Yang from the Stanford Computer Science Department and DEL’s Erik Brynjolfsson will discuss the opportunities of a new partnership between Stanford and the National Center for O*NET Development.
In the last year, AI models have rapidly improved on public benchmarks measuring their ability to carry out research tasks autonomously. Such performance suggests that models may be capable of automating parts of the AI R&D process itself, thereby accelerating the pace of AI progress.
In the last year, AI models have rapidly improved on public benchmarks measuring their ability to carry out research tasks autonomously. Such performance suggests that models may be capable of automating parts of the AI R&D process itself, thereby accelerating the pace of AI progress.
Prior work finds a diversity paradox: Diversity breeds innovation, yet underrepresented groups that diversify organizations have less successful careers within them. Does the diversity paradox hold for scientists as well? We study this by utilizing a near-complete population of ∼1.2 million US doctoral recipients from 1977 to 2015 and following their careers into publishing and faculty positions. We use text analysis and machine learning to answer a series of questions: How do we detect scientific innovations? Are underrepresented groups more likely to generate scientific innovations? And are the innovations of underrepresented groups adopted and rewarded? Our analyses show that underrepresented groups produce higher rates of scientific novelty. However, their novel contributions are devalued and discounted: For example, novel contributions by gender and racial minorities are taken up by other scholars at lower rates than novel contributions by gender and racial majorities, and equally impactful contributions of gender and racial minorities are less likely to result in successful scientific careers than for majority groups. These results suggest there may be unwarranted reproduction of stratification in academic careers that discounts diversity’s role in innovation and partly explains the underrepresentation of some groups in academia.
