221–230 of 463 posts
So sending my CV to every company three times should get me pass the ATS?
if i ever go back into the job market, will need three accounts: Peter J Smith, Peter Smith and PJ Smith. they live in #101, #102 and 103# 5607 Jane Street
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a inhumane way of looking at this. Hiring is deeply flawed, you know it, and yet you keep job postings open for weeks/months in case "the one" magically appears on your doorstep instead of just interviewing 10-20 people and just pick one... Corpo bullshittery at its finest.
What's the alternative? Everyones up in arms, but I see ZERO viable alternatives proposed. If you have 1000 applications for every job, and you know that a bunch of these applications are "a bad fit", to put it mildly, you have to filter. And you cannot realistically give every resume a good, human look. By the time HR would be done, the market has already moved on five times. So, what is the real difference between…
A better way to reformulate this problem is for the LLM to be tasked with making a _comparative_ judgement between two CVs. This should prove much more reliable, especially if you give it a third “too close to call” option. You can also ask for clear justifications of preference.
That's a good idea. The only drawback I see is that you should compare every pair of CVs for best results, and that grows quadraticly with number of CVs. Of course you can settle for fewer comparisons and not perfect results. But then I'm not sure if you can hit a good ratio of quality and token spend.
I see. > LLM is called six times to extract structured information Followed by > The default model is gemma3:4b, running at temperature 0.1 — low, supposedly nudging the model toward deterministic outputs. This is exactly why hiring is even more broken: Because the people looking for candidates are also just as unqualified if not, more. Using much weaker LLMs to replace the person in charge of the final judgement cal…
That would fail to meet the objective of reducing the costs of hiring an experienced person - the entire point of outsourcing to a chatbot.
This word (determinism) has a magical effect of warping any online posts it touches. Once you hear it you can almost guarantee it's going to be misguided. At least this time it's actual determinism (same input = same output), not arbitrary unrelated things. Determinism matters for reproducibility, but do you really want these outputs to be reproducible in this particular case? Making LLM outputs deterministic is rela…
This reminds me of my former CTO. He would take bunch of CVs and randomly throw some of them in a bin. He didn’t want to work with “unlucky” people.
I thought this was only an old urban legend; some people actually use this technique? Especially in a trade supposed to be led by people trained in sciences?
What is an ATS? This blog doesn't define it
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Test retest reliability is a thing in psychometrics.
[flagged]
but moreover, to verify a test item you need to make sure that peopel will select the same answers under teh same conditions at different times. people generally forget the specific questions they were asked if you ask them the same questions a month later so being able to get them to answer the same way each time is important. it is assumed the people have some static knowledge of a topic in this scenario.
If you want to consider a statistical examination of how people answer tests and how we assess knowledge and other things in people through surveying you can read about item response theory and rasch analysis.