Whose doctor does the AI recommend? An algorithm audit of reputation and demographic signals in large language model-assisted physician choice
Patients increasingly ask large language model (LLM) assistants which doctor to see, making these systems AI infomediaries: algorithms that intermediate one person's choice among other people and thereby decide, silently and at scale, which physicians become visible. We report a prespecified randomized algorithm audit of what causally moves those recommendations. Seven models (six open-weight; gpt-4o-mini) each chose among five synthetic family-medicine physician cards whose attributes were independently randomized across 3,024 choice sets, three patient personas, nine prompt paraphrases and nine experimental arms, yielding 40,068 scored responses; gender and ethnicity were signaled through names following correspondence-audit methodology. Reputation signals dominate: raising a rating from 3.9 to 4.7 increases choice probability by 31.4 percentage points (pp), and raising the fee from $90 to $190 lowers it by 20.0 pp. Demographic parity is rejected, but not in the direction human audit studies predict: female-signaled names gain 2.5 pp, and Hispanic-, South-Asian- and Black-signaled names gain 1.3-2.9 pp over White-signaled names, tilts worth $7-$14 per visit in fee-equivalent terms, and a content-free first-listed position is worth $11. Yet models mentioned gender or ethnicity in at most 0.03% of their stated reasons and abstained in 0.39% of trials, so these effects are invisible in the models' own explanations, and transparency obligations relying on model self-report would not detect them. One reasoning model failed the prespecified auditability gate outright. The frozen design makes the audit repeatable: any new model can be assessed against identical stimuli, making recurring behavioural audit, rather than self-reported explanation, the monitoring technology fit for purpose.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Whose hotel does the AI recommend? An algorithm audit of reputation signals in LLM-assisted hotel selection
Travelers increasingly ask large language model (LLM) assistants which hotel to book, making these systems gatekeepers of property visibility -- yet what moves their recommendations is undocumented. We conduct a pre-spec…
Algorithmic Assistance with Recommendation-Dependent Preferences
When an algorithm provides risk assessments, we typically think of them as helpful inputs to human decisions, such as when risk scores are presented to judges or doctors. However, a decision-maker may not only react to t…
Decision MakingImproving Medical Communication using Rubric-Guided Counterfactual Recommendations
Text-based telemedicine increasingly relies on lightweight patient feedback, however, such feedback primarily reflects perceived communication quality rather than medical accuracy. We introduce an LM-guided counterfactua…
Online certification of preference-based fairness for personalized recommender systems
Recommender systems are facing scrutiny because of their growing impact on the opportunities we have access to. Current audits for fairness are limited to coarse-grained parity assessments at the level of sensitive group…
FairnessMulti-Armed BanditsRecommendation SystemsPaperDoctor: Evidence-Grounded and Actionable Feedback for Scientific Papers in Progress
Autoresearch agents are reshaping the research ecosystem, but they can also let flawed claims enter the literature at scale. Human advisors catch such issues in drafts through careful, traceable feedback, yet advisor-sty…