OOF-AII-423123

Predictive Policing Biases of PredPol

Predictive policing algorithms meant to aid law enforcement by predicting future crime show signs of biased output.

Event date
2015-11-18
Country
United States of America
Severity
Moderate
Evidence state
Single-source

Assessment status

Generated from available public incident evidence using OOF® governance methodology. It is not an official investigation, legal determination, regulatory finding, certification, or OOF® Approved Assessment.

View source record from AI Incident Database (Responsible AI Collaborative)

Assessment confidence dimensions

Source corroboration
Single-source

Measures source-group corroboration only; it does not establish factual truth.

Extraction completeness
High

Measures populated source fields after deterministic normalization; it does not measure correctness.

Methodological assignment confidence
High

Measures automated assignment support; substantive correctness requires authorized human review.

Known facts from the incident record

  • The incident record identifies the event date as 2015-11-18.
  • The incident record identifies the location as United States of America.

Reported claims

  • Predictive policing algorithms meant to aid law enforcement by predicting future crime show signs of biased output.

Material unknowns

  • Independent corroboration is not established in the available incident record.

Primary governance problem

The incident appears to expose a governance problem involving predictive, prediction, probability, support, uncertainty. Available reporting supports preliminary methodological interpretation, not a finding of fault or non-compliance.

Architecture intelligence

PGA™ — Prediction Governance Architecture

Primary architecture

The reported predictive, prediction, probability concern falls within the governed questions represented by PGA™ — Prediction Governance Architecture.

Governance focus: Once a sufficiently governed outcome becomes available, how should the prediction be associated with that outcome and its predictive performance legitimately determined over time?

Canonical methodology (ParentStandard):

Preliminary governance questions

  • Once a sufficiently governed outcome becomes available, how should the prediction be associated with that outcome and its predictive performance legitimately determined over time?
  • What operational authority and controls applied to Predpol, Oakland Police Department at the relevant time?
  • What evidence would establish how Ai Enabled Decision Support Systems produced or enabled the reported outcome?
  • What additional independent evidence is required to resolve the material evidence gaps?

Evidence gaps and limitations

  • Only one independent source group is represented; corroboration is not established.
  • AI technology is not specified in the source record.

Return to the public incident index