User-Controllable Recommendation via Counterfactual Retrospective and Prospective Explanations

Modern recommender systems utilize users' historical behaviors to generate personalized recommendations. However, these systems often lack user controllability, leading to diminished user satisfaction and trust in the systems. Acknowledging the recent advancements in explainable recommender systems that enhance users' understanding of recommendation mechanisms, we propose leveraging these advancements to improve user controllability. In this paper, we present a user-controllable recommender system that seamlessly integrates explainability and controllability within a unified framework. By providing both retrospective and prospective explanations through counterfactual reasoning, users can customize their control over the system by interacting with these explanations. Furthermore, we introduce and assess two attributes of controllability in recommendation systems: the complexity of controllability and the accuracy of controllability. Experimental evaluations on MovieLens and Yelp datasets substantiate the effectiveness of our proposed framework. Additionally, our experiments demonstrate that offering users control options can potentially enhance recommendation accuracy in the future. Source code and data are available at \url{https://github.com/chrisjtan/ucr}.Comment: Accepted for presentation at 26th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI2023

The effects of controllability and explainability in a social recommender system

In recent years, researchers in the field of recommender systems have explored a range of advanced interfaces to improve user interactions with recommender systems. Some of the major research ideas explored in this new area include the explainability and controllability of recommendations. Controllability enables end users to participate in the recommendation process by providing various kinds of input. Explainability focuses on making the recommendation process and the reasons behind specific recommendation more clear to the users. While each of these approaches contributes to making traditional “black-box” recommendation more attractive and acceptable to end users, little is known about how these approaches work together. In this paper, we investigate the effects of adding user control and visual explanations in a specific context of an interactive hybrid social recommender system. We present Relevance Tuner+, a hybrid recommender system that allows the users to control the fusion of multiple recommender sources while also offering explanations of both the fusion process and each of the source recommendations. We also report the results of a controlled study (N = 50) that explores the impact of controllability and explainability in this context

User Feedback in Controllable and Explainable Social Recommender Systems: a Linguistic Analysis

Controllable and explainable intelligent user interfaces have been used to provide transparent recommendations. Many researchers have explored interfaces that support user control and provide explanations of the recommendation process and models. To extend the works to real-world decision-making scenarios, we need to understand further the users’ mental models of the enhanced system components. In this paper, we make a step in this direction by investigating a free form feedback left by users of social recommender systems to specify the reasons of selecting prompted social recommendations. With a user study involving 50 subjects (N=50), we present the linguistic changes in using controllable and explainable interfaces for a social information-seeking task. Based on our findings, we discuss design implications for controllable and explainable recommender systems

Interactive Explanation with Varying Level of Details in an Explainable Scientific Literature Recommender System

Explainable recommender systems (RS) have traditionally followed a one-size-fits-all approach, delivering the same explanation level of detail to each user, without considering their individual needs and goals. Further, explanations in RS have so far been presented mostly in a static and non-interactive manner. To fill these research gaps, we aim in this paper to adopt a user-centered, interactive explanation model that provides explanations with different levels of detail and empowers users to interact with, control, and personalize the explanations based on their needs and preferences. We followed a user-centered approach to design interactive explanations with three levels of detail (basic, intermediate, and advanced) and implemented them in the transparent Recommendation and Interest Modeling Application (RIMA). We conducted a qualitative user study (N=14) to investigate the impact of providing interactive explanations with varying level of details on the users' perception of the explainable RS. Our study showed qualitative evidence that fostering interaction and giving users control in deciding which explanation they would like to see can meet the demands of users with different needs, preferences, and goals, and consequently can have positive effects on different crucial aspects in explainable recommendation, including transparency, trust, satisfaction, and user experience.Comment: 23 page

LIMEADE: A General Framework for Explanation-Based Human Tuning of Opaque Machine Learners

Research in human-centered AI has shown the benefits of systems that can explain their predictions. Methods that allow humans to tune a model in response to the explanations are similarly useful. While both capabilities are well-developed for transparent learning models (e.g., linear models and GA2Ms), and recent techniques (e.g., LIME and SHAP) can generate explanations for opaque models, no method for tuning opaque models in response to explanations has been user-tested to date. This paper introduces LIMEADE, a general framework for tuning an arbitrary machine learning model based on an explanation of the model's prediction. We demonstrate the generality of our approach with two case studies. First, we successfully utilize LIMEADE for the human tuning of opaque image classifiers. Second, we apply our framework to a neural recommender system for scientific papers on a public website and report on a user study showing that our framework leads to significantly higher perceived user control, trust, and satisfaction. Analyzing 300 user logs from our publicly-deployed website, we uncover a tradeoff between canonical greedy explanations and diverse explanations that better facilitate human tuning.Comment: 16 pages, 7 figure

Evaluating the effectiveness of explanations for recommender systems : Methodological issues and empirical studies on the impact of personalization

Peer reviewedPostprin

Exploring explanations for matrix factorization recommender systems (Position Paper)

In this paper we address the problem of finding explanations for collaborative filtering algorithms that use matrix factorization methods. We look for explanations that increase the transparency of the system. To do so, we propose two measures. First, we show a model that describes the contribution of each previous rating given by a user to the generated recommendation. Second, we measure then influence of changing each previous rating of a user on the outcome of the recommender system. We show that under the assumption that there are many more users in the system than there are items, we can efficiently generate each type of explanation by using linear approximations of the recommender system’s behavior for each user, and computing partial derivatives of predicted ratings with respect to each user’s provided ratings.http://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/fatrec/2017/1/7/Published versio

Recommender systems and their ethical challenges

This article presents the first, systematic analysis of the ethical challenges posed by recommender systems through a literature review. The article identifies six areas of concern, and maps them onto a proposed taxonomy of different kinds of ethical impact. The analysis uncovers a gap in the literature: currently user-centred approaches do not consider the interests of a variety of other stakeholders—as opposed to just the receivers of a recommendation—in assessing the ethical impacts of a recommender system