arXiv:2609.19530v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Hiring is bilateral: employers assess fit, while candidates present and defend evidence of their qualifications. Yet r\'esum\'e screening, the first gate, is commonly automated as a static, one-call judgment over a r\'esum\'e-job pair. We study a two-agent alternative in which employer-side and candidate-side agents represent these roles, exchange evidence, and update their judgments before deciding who advances. We compare procedures on 600 constructed r\'esum\'e-job pairs using GPT-5.5 and Claude Opus 4.7. Two-agent screening advances more applications (33.3% to 39.3% for GPT-5.5; 34.0% to 35.5% for Opus 4.7). Across three runs on the common 191-pair borderline pool, pass-instance rates rise from 4.5% to 26.2% and from 6.5% to 16.1%, respectively. This is not a uniform relaxation: two-agent screening rejects applications one-call advances, changing decisions in both directions. At similar pass volumes, the procedures advance different applications, and no one-call threshold recovers applications consistently selected by two-agent screening. Among discovery-selected cases re-executed in fresh runs, two-agent-only selections recur less often than shared selections, clearly under GPT-5.5 and less certainly under Opus 4.7, while a separate one-call follow-up shows no comparable decline. As hiring becomes agent-mediated on both sides, the screening procedure, not only the model behind it, shapes who reaches human review and how reliably that access recurs.
Abstract: Hiring is bilateral: employers assess fit, while candidates present and defend evidence of their qualifications. Yet r\'esum\'e screening, the first gate, is commonly automated as a static, one-call judgment over a r\'esum\'e-job pair. We study a two-agent alternative in which employer-side and candidate-side agents represent these roles, exchange evidence, and update their judgments before deciding who advances. We compare procedures on 600 constructed r\'esum\'e-job pairs using GPT-5.5 and Claude Opus 4.7. Two-agent screening advances more applications (33.3% to 39.3% for GPT-5.5; 34.0% to 35.5% for Opus 4.7). Across three runs on the common 191-pair borderline pool, pass-instance rates rise from 4.5% to 26.2% and from 6.5% to 16.1%, respectively. This is not a uniform relaxation: two-agent screening rejects applications one-call advances, changing decisions in both directions. At similar pass volumes, the procedures advance different applications, and no one-call threshold recovers applications consistently selected by two-agent screening. Among discovery-selected cases re-executed in fresh runs, two-agent-only selections recur less often than shared selections, clearly under GPT-5.5 and less certainly under Opus 4.7, while a separate one-call follow-up shows no comparable decline. As hiring becomes agent-mediated on both sides, the screening procedure, not only the model behind it, shapes who reaches human review and how reliably that access recurs.
This article has been indexed from cs.AI updates on arXiv.org
Read the original article: