504 research outputs found

    Recommender systems fairness evaluation via generalized cross entropy

    Full text link
    Fairness in recommender systems has been considered with respect to sensitive attributes of users (e.g., gender, race) or items (e.g., revenue in a multistakeholder setting). Regardless, the concept has been commonly interpreted as some form of equality – i.e., the degree to which the system is meeting the information needs of all its users in an equal sense. In this paper, we argue that fairness in recommender systems does not necessarily imply equality, but instead it should consider a distribution of resources based on merits and needs.We present a probabilistic framework based ongeneralized cross entropy to evaluate fairness of recommender systems under this perspective, wherewe showthat the proposed framework is flexible and explanatory by allowing to incorporate domain knowledge (through an ideal fair distribution) that can help to understand which item or user aspects a recommendation algorithm is over- or under-representing. Results on two real-world datasets show the merits of the proposed evaluation framework both in terms of user and item fairnessThis work was supported in part by the Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval and in part by project TIN2016-80630-P (MINECO

    A flexible framework for evaluating user and item fairness in recommender systems

    Full text link
    This version of the article has been accepted for publication, after peer review (when applicable) and is subject to Springer Nature’s AM terms of use, but is not the Version of Record and does not reflect post-acceptance improvements, or any corrections. The Version of Record is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-020-09285-1One common characteristic of research works focused on fairness evaluation (in machine learning) is that they call for some form of parity (equality) either in treatment—meaning they ignore the information about users’ memberships in protected classes during training—or in impact—by enforcing proportional beneficial outcomes to users in different protected classes. In the recommender systems community, fairness has been studied with respect to both users’ and items’ memberships in protected classes defined by some sensitive attributes (e.g., gender or race for users, revenue in a multi-stakeholder setting for items). Again here, the concept has been commonly interpreted as some form of equality—i.e., the degree to which the system is meeting the information needs of all its users in an equal sense. In this work, we propose a probabilistic framework based on generalized cross entropy (GCE) to measure fairness of a given recommendation model. The framework comes with a suite of advantages: first, it allows the system designer to define and measure fairness for both users and items and can be applied to any classification task; second, it can incorporate various notions of fairness as it does not rely on specific and predefined probability distributions and they can be defined at design time; finally, in its design it uses a gain factor, which can be flexibly defined to contemplate different accuracy-related metrics to measure fairness upon decision-support metrics (e.g., precision, recall) or rank-based measures (e.g., NDCG, MAP). An experimental evaluation on four real-world datasets shows the nuances captured by our proposed metric regarding fairness on different user and item attributes, where nearest-neighbor recommenders tend to obtain good results under equality constraints. We observed that when the users are clustered based on both their interaction with the system and other sensitive attributes, such as age or gender, algorithms with similar performance values get different behaviors with respect to user fairness due to the different way they process data for each user clusterThe authors thank the reviewers for their thoughtful comments and suggestions. This work was supported in part by the Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovacion y Universidades (Reference: 123496 Y. Deldjoo et al. PID2019-108965GB-I00) and in part by the Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the sponsor

    Consumer-side Fairness in Recommender Systems: A Systematic Survey of Methods and Evaluation

    Full text link
    In the current landscape of ever-increasing levels of digitalization, we are facing major challenges pertaining to scalability. Recommender systems have become irreplaceable both for helping users navigate the increasing amounts of data and, conversely, aiding providers in marketing products to interested users. The growing awareness of discrimination in machine learning methods has recently motivated both academia and industry to research how fairness can be ensured in recommender systems. For recommender systems, such issues are well exemplified by occupation recommendation, where biases in historical data may lead to recommender systems relating one gender to lower wages or to the propagation of stereotypes. In particular, consumer-side fairness, which focuses on mitigating discrimination experienced by users of recommender systems, has seen a vast number of diverse approaches for addressing different types of discrimination. The nature of said discrimination depends on the setting and the applied fairness interpretation, of which there are many variations. This survey serves as a systematic overview and discussion of the current research on consumer-side fairness in recommender systems. To that end, a novel taxonomy based on high-level fairness interpretation is proposed and used to categorize the research and their proposed fairness evaluation metrics. Finally, we highlight some suggestions for the future direction of the field.Comment: Draft submitted to Springer (November 2022

    Understanding and Mitigating Multi-sided Exposure Bias in Recommender Systems

    Get PDF
    Fairness is a critical system-level objective in recommender systems that has been the subject of extensive recent research. It is especially important in multi-sided recommendation platforms where it may be crucial to optimize utilities not just for the end user, but also for other actors such as item sellers or producers who desire a fair representation of their items. Existing solutions do not properly address various aspects of multi-sided fairness in recommendations as they may either solely have one-sided view (i.e. improving the fairness only for one side), or do not appropriately measure the fairness for each actor involved in the system. In this thesis, I aim at first investigating the impact of unfair recommendations on the system and how these unfair recommendations can negatively affect major actors in the system. Then, I seek to propose solutions to tackle the unfairness of recommendations. I propose a rating transformation technique that works as a pre-processing step before building the recommendation model to alleviate the inherent popularity bias in the input data and consequently to mitigate the exposure unfairness for items and suppliers in the recommendation lists. Also, as another solution, I propose a general graph-based solution that works as a post-processing approach after recommendation generation for mitigating the multi-sided exposure bias in the recommendation results. For evaluation, I introduce several metrics for measuring the exposure fairness for items and suppliers, and show that these metrics better capture the fairness properties in the recommendation results. I perform extensive experiments to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed solutions. The experiments on different publicly-available datasets and comparison with various baselines confirm the superiority of the proposed solutions in improving the exposure fairness for items and suppliers.Comment: Doctoral thesi

    Counterfactual Explanation for Fairness in Recommendation

    Full text link
    Fairness-aware recommendation eliminates discrimination issues to build trustworthy recommendation systems.Explaining the causes of unfair recommendations is critical, as it promotes fairness diagnostics, and thus secures users' trust in recommendation models. Existing fairness explanation methods suffer high computation burdens due to the large-scale search space and the greedy nature of the explanation search process. Besides, they perform score-based optimizations with continuous values, which are not applicable to discrete attributes such as gender and race. In this work, we adopt the novel paradigm of counterfactual explanation from causal inference to explore how minimal alterations in explanations change model fairness, to abandon the greedy search for explanations. We use real-world attributes from Heterogeneous Information Networks (HINs) to empower counterfactual reasoning on discrete attributes. We propose a novel Counterfactual Explanation for Fairness (CFairER) that generates attribute-level counterfactual explanations from HINs for recommendation fairness. Our CFairER conducts off-policy reinforcement learning to seek high-quality counterfactual explanations, with an attentive action pruning reducing the search space of candidate counterfactuals. The counterfactual explanations help to provide rational and proximate explanations for model fairness, while the attentive action pruning narrows the search space of attributes. Extensive experiments demonstrate our proposed model can generate faithful explanations while maintaining favorable recommendation performance
    • …
    corecore