微信内可能无法直接打开本站。请点右上角 ··· → 在浏览器打开,或复制链接。
From Matching Models to Recruiting Agents: A Systematized Narrative Review of AI Recruitment Systems, Evaluation, and Governance
RSS 官方收录 · 可信分层展示
关键摘要
AI招聘系统演进:从匹配模型到工具型招聘代理,覆盖40项研究
- AI招聘自动化对象已转向多阶段工作流而非简单简历匹配
- 分析三大转变:相似性→双向适配、单模型→复合工作流、离线预测→证据驱动评估
- 识别四大持久缺口:行为标签混淆、数据局限、评分掩盖管道失败、隐私未被联合评估
AI 摘要 · 来源可核验
正文提要
arXiv:2609.04286v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Artificial intelligence in recruitment has shifted the object being automated from profile pairs and ranked lists to multi-stage workflows that retrieve evidence, compare candidates, and support or execute actions. This systematized narrative review traces that development from bilateral retrieval and behavioral ranking through neural person--job matching, large language model (LLM) components, and tool-using recruiting agents. Using a purposive search and coding protocol updated through 23 July 2026, plus targeted updates through 2 September 2026, we organize 40 representative works with supporting industrial and legal sources. This synthesis is not a prevalence estimate. We analyze three coupled transitions: from similarity to reciprocal suitability, from a model to a compound workflow, and from offline prediction to evidence- and productivity-aligned evaluation. Across document understanding, retrieval, ranking, assessment, interviewing, sourcing, and human handoff, we distinguish field-, pair-, list-, case-, trajectory-, and outcome-level evidence. Persistent gaps arise because behavioral labels confound exposure, preference, and qualification; private and synthetic data limit external validity; final-output scores conceal pipeline failures; and, within the coded set, privacy is not directly evaluated and no row jointly evaluates utility, fairness, privacy, and security. These observations describe the coded set rather than the field as a whole. We therefore introduce a staged mapping from evaluation evidence to the strongest defensible claim, together with an agenda for reciprocal, evidence-grounded, temporally controlled, selective, and auditable systems. Progress should be judged by whether workflows retrieve the right evidence, preserve uncertainty, support contestable decisions, and improve outcomes under explicit cost and risk constraints.