227 research outputs found
Filter Bubbles in Recommender Systems: Fact or Fallacy -- A Systematic Review
A filter bubble refers to the phenomenon where Internet customization
effectively isolates individuals from diverse opinions or materials, resulting
in their exposure to only a select set of content. This can lead to the
reinforcement of existing attitudes, beliefs, or conditions. In this study, our
primary focus is to investigate the impact of filter bubbles in recommender
systems. This pioneering research aims to uncover the reasons behind this
problem, explore potential solutions, and propose an integrated tool to help
users avoid filter bubbles in recommender systems. To achieve this objective,
we conduct a systematic literature review on the topic of filter bubbles in
recommender systems. The reviewed articles are carefully analyzed and
classified, providing valuable insights that inform the development of an
integrated approach. Notably, our review reveals evidence of filter bubbles in
recommendation systems, highlighting several biases that contribute to their
existence. Moreover, we propose mechanisms to mitigate the impact of filter
bubbles and demonstrate that incorporating diversity into recommendations can
potentially help alleviate this issue. The findings of this timely review will
serve as a benchmark for researchers working in interdisciplinary fields such
as privacy, artificial intelligence ethics, and recommendation systems.
Furthermore, it will open new avenues for future research in related domains,
prompting further exploration and advancement in this critical area.Comment: 21 pages, 10 figures and 5 table
Pyramid: Enhancing Selectivity in Big Data Protection with Count Featurization
Protecting vast quantities of data poses a daunting challenge for the growing
number of organizations that collect, stockpile, and monetize it. The ability
to distinguish data that is actually needed from data collected "just in case"
would help these organizations to limit the latter's exposure to attack. A
natural approach might be to monitor data use and retain only the working-set
of in-use data in accessible storage; unused data can be evicted to a highly
protected store. However, many of today's big data applications rely on machine
learning (ML) workloads that are periodically retrained by accessing, and thus
exposing to attack, the entire data store. Training set minimization methods,
such as count featurization, are often used to limit the data needed to train
ML workloads to improve performance or scalability. We present Pyramid, a
limited-exposure data management system that builds upon count featurization to
enhance data protection. As such, Pyramid uniquely introduces both the idea and
proof-of-concept for leveraging training set minimization methods to instill
rigor and selectivity into big data management. We integrated Pyramid into
Spark Velox, a framework for ML-based targeting and personalization. We
evaluate it on three applications and show that Pyramid approaches
state-of-the-art models while training on less than 1% of the raw data
Individual Fairness in Hindsight
Since many critical decisions impacting human lives are increasingly being
made by algorithms, it is important to ensure that the treatment of individuals
under such algorithms is demonstrably fair under reasonable notions of
fairness. One compelling notion proposed in the literature is that of
individual fairness (IF), which advocates that similar individuals should be
treated similarly (Dwork et al. 2012). Originally proposed for offline
decisions, this notion does not, however, account for temporal considerations
relevant for online decision-making. In this paper, we extend the notion of IF
to account for the time at which a decision is made, in settings where there
exists a notion of conduciveness of decisions as perceived by the affected
individuals. We introduce two definitions: (i) fairness-across-time (FT) and
(ii) fairness-in-hindsight (FH). FT is the simplest temporal extension of IF
where treatment of individuals is required to be individually fair relative to
the past as well as future, while in FH, we require a one-sided notion of
individual fairness that is defined relative to only the past decisions. We
show that these two definitions can have drastically different implications in
the setting where the principal needs to learn the utility model. Linear regret
relative to optimal individually fair decisions is inevitable under FT for
non-trivial examples. On the other hand, we design a new algorithm: Cautious
Fair Exploration (CaFE), which satisfies FH and achieves sub-linear regret
guarantees for a broad range of settings. We characterize lower bounds showing
that these guarantees are order-optimal in the worst case. FH can thus be
embedded as a primary safeguard against unfair discrimination in algorithmic
deployments, without hindering the ability to take good decisions in the
long-run
- …