This study investigates the potential of language models to improve the classification of labor market information by linking job vacancy texts to two major European frameworks: the European Skills, Competences, Qualifications and Occupations (ESCO) taxonomy and the European Qualifications Framework (EQF). We examine and compare two prominent methodologies from the literature: Sentence Linking and Entity Linking. In support of ongoing research, we release an open-source tool, incorporating these two methodologies, designed to facilitate further work on labor classification and employment discourse. To move beyond surface-level skill extraction, we introduce two annotated datasets specifically aimed at evaluating how occupations and qualifications are represented within job vacancy texts. Additionally, we examine different ways to utilize generative large language models for this task. Our findings contribute to advancing the state of the art in job entity extraction and offer computational infrastructure for examining work, skills, and labor market narratives in a digitally mediated economy. Our code is made publicly available: https://github.com/tabiya-tech/tabiya-livelihoods-classifier

Talent search is a cornerstone of modern recruitment systems, yet existing approaches often struggle to capture nuanced job-specific preferences, model recruiter behavior at a fine-grained level, and mitigate noise from subjective human judgments. We present a novel framework that enhances talent search effectiveness and delivers substantial business value through two key innovations: (i) leveraging LLMs to extract fine-grained recruitment signals from job descriptions and historical hiring data, and (ii) employing a role-aware multi-gate MoE network to capture behavioral differences across recruiter roles. To further reduce noise, we introduce a multi-task learning module that jointly optimizes click-through rate (CTR), conversion rate (CVR), and resume matching relevance. Experiments on real-world recruitment data and online A/B testing show relative AUC gains of 1.70% (CTR) and 5.97% (CVR), and a 17.29% lift in click-through conversion rate. These improvements reduce dependence on external sourcing channels, enabling an estimated annual cost saving of millions of CNY.

Standard Occupational Classifiers (SOC) are systems used to categorize and classify different types of jobs and occupations based on their similarities in terms of job duties, skills, and qualifications. Integrating these facets with Big Data from job advertisement offers the prospect to investigate labour demand that is specific to various occupations. This project investigates the use of recent developments in natural language processing to construct a classifier capable of assigning an occupation code to a given job advertisement. We develop various classifiers for both UK ONS SOC and US O*NET SOC, using different Language Models. We find that an ensemble model, which combines Google BERT and a Neural Network classifier while considering job title, description, and skills, achieved the highest prediction accuracy. Specifically, the ensemble model exhibited a classification accuracy of up to 61% for the lower (or fourth) tier of SOC, and 72% for the third tier of SOC. This model could provide up to date, accurate information on the evolution of the labour market using job advertisements.

Avoiding bias and understanding the real-world consequences of AI-supported decision-making are critical to address fairness and assign accountability. Existing approaches often focus either on technical aspects, such as datasets and models, or on high-level socio-ethical considerations - rarely capturing how these elements interact in practice. In this paper, we apply an information flow-based modeling framework to a real-world recruitment process that integrates automated candidate matching with human decision-making. Through semi-structured stakeholder interviews and iterative modeling, we construct a multi-level representation of the recruitment pipeline, capturing how information is transformed, filtered, and interpreted across both algorithmic and human components. We identify where biases may emerge, how they can propagate through the system, and what downstream impacts they may have on candidates. This case study illustrates how information flow modeling can support structured analysis of fairness risks, providing transparency across complex socio-technical systems.

Hiring processes often involve the manual screening of hundreds of resumes for each job, a task that is time and effort consuming, error-prone, and subject to human bias. This paper presents Smart-Hiring, an end-to-end Natural Language Processing (NLP) pipeline de- signed to automatically extract structured information from unstructured resumes and to semantically match candidates with job descriptions. The proposed system combines document parsing, named-entity recognition, and contextual text embedding techniques to capture skills, experience, and qualifications. Using advanced NLP technics, Smart-Hiring encodes both resumes and job descriptions in a shared vector space to compute similarity scores between candidates and job postings. The pipeline is modular and explainable, allowing users to inspect extracted entities and matching rationales. Experiments were conducted on a real-world dataset of resumes and job descriptions spanning multiple professional domains, demonstrating the robustness and feasibility of the proposed approach. The system achieves competitive matching accuracy while preserving a high degree of interpretability and transparency in its decision process. This work introduces a scalable and practical NLP frame- work for recruitment analytics and outlines promising directions for bias mitigation, fairness-aware modeling, and large-scale deployment of data-driven hiring solutions.

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance across a wide range of natural language processing tasks. However, deploying LLMs at scale for domain specific applications, such as job-person fit and explanation in job seeking platforms, introduces distinct challenges. At LinkedIn, the job person fit task requires analyzing a candidate's public profile against job requirements to produce both a fit assessment and a detailed explanation. Directly applying open source or finetuned LLMs to this task often fails to yield high quality, actionable feedback due to the complexity of the domain and the need for structured outputs. Moreover, the large size of these models leads to high inference latency and limits scalability, making them unsuitable for online use. To address these challenges, we introduce LANTERN, a novel LLM knowledge distillation framework tailored specifically for job person fit tasks. LANTERN involves modeling over multiple objectives, an encoder model for classification purpose, and a decoder model for explanation purpose. To better distill the knowledge from a strong black box teacher model to multiple downstream models, LANTERN incorporates multi level knowledge distillation that integrates both data and logit level insights. In addition to introducing the knowledge distillation framework, we share our insights on post training techniques and prompt engineering, both of which are crucial for successfully adapting LLMs to domain specific downstream tasks. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that LANTERN significantly improves task specific metrics for both job person fit and explanation. Online evaluations further confirm its effectiveness, showing measurable gains in job seeker engagement, including a 0.24\% increase in apply rate and a 0.28\% increase in qualified applications.

The rapid evolution of neural architectures - from multilayer perceptrons to large-scale Transformer-based models - has enabled language models (LLMs) to exhibit emergent agentic behaviours when equipped with memory, planning, and external tool use. However, their inherent stochasticity and multi-step decision processes render classical evaluation methods inadequate for diagnosing agentic performance. This work introduces a diagnostic framework for expert systems that not only evaluates but also facilitates the transfer of expert behaviour into LLM-powered agents. The framework integrates (i) curated golden datasets of expert annotations, (ii) silver datasets generated through controlled behavioural mutation, and (iii) an LLM-based Agent Judge that scores and prescribes targeted improvements. These prescriptions are embedded into a vectorized recommendation map, allowing expert interventions to propagate as reusable improvement trajectories across multiple system instances. We demonstrate the framework on a multi-agent recruiter-assistant system, showing that it uncovers latent cognitive failures - such as biased phrasing, extraction drift, and tool misrouting - while simultaneously steering agents toward expert-level reasoning and style. The results establish a foundation for standardized, reproducible expert behaviour transfer in stochastic, tool-augmented LLM agents, moving beyond static evaluation to active expert system refinement.

The Engineers' Salary Prediction Challenge requires classifying salary categories into three classes based on tabular data. The job description is represented as a 300-dimensional word embedding incorporated into the tabular features, drastically increasing dimensionality. Additionally, the limited number of training samples makes classification challenging. Linear dimensionality reduction of word embeddings for tabular data classification remains underexplored. This paper studies Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA). We show that PCA, with an appropriate subspace dimension, can outperform raw embeddings. LDA without regularization performs poorly due to covariance estimation errors, but applying shrinkage improves performance significantly, even with only two dimensions. We propose Partitioned-LDA, which splits embeddings into equal-sized blocks and performs LDA separately on each, thereby reducing the size of the covariance matrices. Partitioned-LDA outperforms regular LDA and, combined with shrinkage, achieves top-10 accuracy on the competition public leaderboard. This method effectively enhances word embedding performance in tabular data classification with limited training samples.

In this study, we conduct a resume-screening experiment (N=528) where people collaborate with simulated AI models exhibiting race-based preferences (bias) to evaluate candidates for 16 high and low status occupations. Simulated AI bias approximates factual and counterfactual estimates of racial bias in real-world AI systems. We investigate people's preferences for White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian candidates (represented through names and affinity groups on quality-controlled resumes) across 1,526 scenarios and measure their unconscious associations between race and status using implicit association tests (IATs), which predict discriminatory hiring decisions but have not been investigated in human-AI collaboration. When making decisions without AI or with AI that exhibits no race-based preferences, people select all candidates at equal rates. However, when interacting with AI favoring a particular group, people also favor those candidates up to 90% of the time, indicating a significant behavioral shift. The likelihood of selecting candidates whose identities do not align with common race-status stereotypes can increase by 13% if people complete an IAT before conducting resume screening. Finally, even if people think AI recommendations are low quality or not important, their decisions are still vulnerable to AI bias under certain circumstances. This work has implications for people's autonomy in AI-HITL scenarios, AI and work, design and evaluation of AI hiring systems, and strategies for mitigating bias in collaborative decision-making tasks. In particular, organizational and regulatory policy should acknowledge the complex nature of AI-HITL decision making when implementing these systems, educating people who use them, and determining which are subject to oversight.

The use of large language models (LLMs) in hiring promises to streamline candidate screening, but it also raises serious concerns regarding accuracy and algorithmic bias where sufficient safeguards are not in place. In this work, we benchmark several state-of-the-art foundational LLMs - including models from OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Meta, and Deepseek, and compare them with our proprietary domain-specific hiring model (Match Score) for job candidate matching. We evaluate each model's predictive accuracy (ROC AUC, Precision-Recall AUC, F1-score) and fairness (impact ratio of cut-off analysis across declared gender, race, and intersectional subgroups). Our experiments on a dataset of roughly 10,000 real-world recent candidate-job pairs show that Match Score outperforms the general-purpose LLMs on accuracy (ROC AUC 0.85 vs 0.77) and achieves significantly more equitable outcomes across demographic groups. Notably, Match Score attains a minimum race-wise impact ratio of 0.957 (near-parity), versus 0.809 or lower for the best LLMs, (0.906 vs 0.773 for the intersectionals, respectively). We discuss why pretraining biases may cause LLMs with insufficient safeguards to propagate societal biases in hiring scenarios, whereas a bespoke supervised model can more effectively mitigate these biases. Our findings highlight the importance of domain-specific modeling and bias auditing when deploying AI in high-stakes domains such as hiring, and caution against relying on off-the-shelf LLMs for such tasks without extensive fairness safeguards. Furthermore, we show with empirical evidence that there shouldn't be a dichotomy between choosing accuracy and fairness in hiring: a well-designed algorithm can achieve both accuracy in hiring and fairness in outcomes.