With the booming development of digital technology, algorithmic automated decision making is applied in both public and private fields because of its efficient data collection and processing capabilities as well as certainty and uniformity. The wide application of algorithmic automated decision-making brings great convenience to personal life, business operation and public governance, but also brings the risk of algorithmic alienation and discrimination. In order to regulate the discrimination risk of automatic algorithm decision making, the first thing is to adhere to the consciousness of human's subject status. Automatic algorithm decision making is still a kind of intelligent advanced tool serving human beings. On this premise, the transparency of decision making is improved and the relief method of responsibility distribution after automatic decision discrimination infringement is clarified.

Wu Xue. Legal Governance of Discrimination Risks in Algorithmic Automated Decision Making. The Frontiers of Society, Science and Technology (2023) Vol. 5, Issue 1: 68-72. https://doi.org/10.25236/FSST.2023.050113.

[1] Niyi, Basukoski Artie, Chaussalet Thierry,” (2021). An Exploration of Ethical Decision Making with Intelligence Augmentation”, Social Sciences. 

[2] Bonezzi, A., Ostinelli, M., & Melzner, J. (2022). The human black-box: The illusion of understanding human better than algorithmic decision-making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.

[3] Tolan, S.  (2019). Fair and Unbiased Algorithmic Decision Making: Current State and Future Challenges. 10.48550/arXiv.1901.04730.

[4] Gal, & Michal, S. . (2018). Algorithmic challenges to autonomous choice. Michigan Technology Law Review.

[5] Lilian, Edwards, Michael, & Veale. (2017). Slave to the algorithm? why a 'right to an explanation' is probably not the remedy you are looking for. Duke Law & Technology Review.