Key sentence from the original study, and good on the researchers from posting it,
"Second, the analyses do not provide any guidance on whether arrests are themselves systemically biased. Such could be the case, for example, if black and Latino individuals experienced arrest at a rate disproportionate to their share of offending. The current study is only able to ascertain that arrest rates for black and Latino individuals were not impacted, positively or negatively, by using predictive policing. "
A more accurate title would be that the study finds that predictive policing is not more or less biased than traditional policing methods.
Agreeing with others, this study basically shows that the computer is replicating whatever biases the human analyst has. The trick would be to find out what biases the humans may have and see if you can make an algorithm that reduces them.
The title should be "evidence finds racial biasing at a statistically indistinguishable level between predictive policing and policing in the control group" NOT "evidence finds no bias." The original wording gives the appearance that policing resolves racial biasing, when it appears to preserve racial biases --at best.
From the paper:
"We find that there were no significant differences in the proportion of arrests by racial-ethnic group between control and treatment conditions. We find that the total numbers of arrests at the division level declined or remained unchanged during predictive policing deployments. Arrests were numerically higher at the algorithmically predicted locations. When adjusted for the higher overall crime rate at algorithmically predicted locations, however, arrests were lower or unchanged."