Fairness of Exposure in Dynamic Recommendation

Exposure bias is a well-known issue in recommender systems where the exposure is not fairly distributed among items in the recommendation results. This is especially problematic when bias is amplified over time as a few items (e.g., popular ones) are repeatedly over-represented in recommendation lists and users' interactions with those items will amplify bias towards those items over time resulting in a feedback loop. This issue has been extensively studied in the literature in static recommendation environment where a single round of recommendation result is processed to improve the exposure fairness. However, less work has been done on addressing exposure bias in a dynamic recommendation setting where the system is operating over time, the recommendation model and the input data are dynamically updated with ongoing user feedback on recommended items at each round. In this paper, we study exposure bias in a dynamic recommendation setting. Our goal is to show that existing bias mitigation methods that are designed to operate in a static recommendation setting are unable to satisfy fairness of exposure for items in long run. In particular, we empirically study one of these methods and show that repeatedly applying this method fails to fairly distribute exposure among items in long run. To address this limitation, we show how this method can be adapted to effectively operate in a dynamic recommendation setting and achieve exposure fairness for items in long run. Experiments on a real-world dataset confirm that our solution is superior in achieving long-term exposure fairness for the items while maintaining the recommendation accuracy.

Exposure-Aware Recommendation using Contextual Bandits

Exposure bias is a well-known issue in recommender systems where items and suppliers are not equally represented in the recommendation results. This is especially problematic when bias is amplified over time as a few items (e.g., popular ones) are repeatedly over-represented in recommendation lists and users' interactions with those items will amplify bias towards those items over time resulting in a feedback loop. This issue has been extensively studied in the literature on model-based or neighborhood-based recommendation algorithms, but less work has been done on online recommendation models, such as those based on top-K contextual bandits, where recommendation models are dynamically updated with ongoing user feedback. In this paper, we study exposure bias in a class of well-known contextual bandit algorithms known as Linear Cascading Bandits. We analyze these algorithms on their ability to handle exposure bias and provide a fair representation for items in the recommendation results. Our analysis reveals that these algorithms tend to amplify exposure disparity among items over time. In particular, we observe that these algorithms do not properly adapt to the feedback provided by the users and frequently recommend certain items even when those items are not selected by users. To mitigate this bias, we propose an Exposure-Aware (EA) reward model that updates the model parameters based on two factors: 1) user feedback (i.e., clicked or not), and 2) position of the item in the recommendation list. This way, the proposed model controls the utility assigned to items based on their exposure in the recommendation list. Extensive experiments on two real-world datasets using three contextual bandit algorithms show that the proposed reward model reduces exposure bias amplification in long run while maintaining the recommendation accuracy.

Behavioral Player Rating in Competitive Online Shooter Games

Competitive online games use rating systems for matchmaking; progression-based algorithms that estimate the skill level of players with interpretable ratings in terms of the outcome of the games they played. However, the overall experience of players is shaped by factors beyond the sole outcome of their games. In this paper, we engineer several features from in-game statistics to model players and create ratings that accurately represent their behavior and true performance level. We then compare the estimating power of our behavioral ratings against ratings created with three mainstream rating systems by predicting rank of players in four popular game modes from the competitive shooter genre. Our results show that the behavioral ratings present more accurate performance estimations while maintaining the interpretability of the created representations. Considering different aspects of the playing behavior of players and using behavioral ratings for matchmaking can lead to match-ups that are more aligned with players' goals and interests, consequently resulting in a more enjoyable gaming experience.

Using user's local context to support local news

American local newspapers have been experiencing a large loss of reader retention and business within the past 15 years due to the proliferation of online news sources. Local media companies are starting to shift from an advertising-supported business model to one based on subscriptions to mitigate this problem. With this subscription model, there is a need to increase user engagement and personalization, and recommender systems are one way for these news companies to accomplish this goal. However, using standard modeling approaches that focus on users' global preferences is not appropriate in this context because the local preferences of users exhibit some specific characteristics which do not necessarily match their long-term or global preferences in the news. Our research explores a localized session-based recommendation approach, using recommendations based on local news articles and articles pertaining to the different local news categories. Experiments performed on a news dataset from a local newspaper show that these local models, particularly certain categories of items, do indeed provide more accuracy and effectiveness for personalization which, in turn, may lead to more user engagement with local news content.

Player Modeling using Behavioral Signals in Competitive Online Games

Competitive online games use rating systems to match players with similar skills to ensure a satisfying experience for players. In this paper, we focus on the importance of addressing different aspects of playing behavior when modeling players for creating match-ups. To this end, we engineer several behavioral features from a dataset of over 75,000 battle royale matches and create player models based on the retrieved features. We then use the created models to predict ranks for different groups of players in the data. The predicted ranks are compared to those of three popular rating systems. Our results show the superiority of simple behavioral models over mainstream rating systems. Some behavioral features provided accurate predictions for all groups of players while others proved useful for certain groups of players. The results of this study highlight the necessity of considering different aspects of the player's behavior such as goals, strategy, and expertise when making assignments.

How does the User's Knowledge of the Recommender Influence their Behavior?

Recommender systems have become a ubiquitous part of modern web applications. They help users discover new and relevant items. Today's users, through years of interaction with these systems have developed an inherent understanding of how recommender systems function, what their objectives are, and how the user might manipulate them. We describe this understanding as the Theory of the Recommender. In this study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with forty recommender system users to empirically explore the relevant factors influencing user behavior. Our findings, based on a rigorous thematic analysis of the collected data, suggest that users possess an intuitive and sophisticated understanding of the recommender system's behavior. We also found that users, based upon their understanding, attitude, and intentions change their interactions to evoke desired recommender behavior. Finally, we discuss the potential implications of such user behavior on recommendation performance.

Unbiased Cascade Bandits: Mitigating Exposure Bias in Online Learning to Rank Recommendation

Exposure bias is a well-known issue in recommender systems where items and suppliers are not equally represented in the recommendation results. This is especially problematic when bias is amplified over time as a few popular items are repeatedly over-represented in recommendation lists. This phenomenon can be viewed as a recommendation feedback loop: the system repeatedly recommends certain items at different time points and interactions of users with those items will amplify bias towards those items over time. This issue has been extensively studied in the literature on model-based or neighborhood-based recommendation algorithms, but less work has been done on online recommendation models such as those based on multi-armed Bandit algorithms. In this paper, we study exposure bias in a class of well-known bandit algorithms known as Linear Cascade Bandits. We analyze these algorithms on their ability to handle exposure bias and provide a fair representation for items and suppliers in the recommendation results. Our analysis reveals that these algorithms fail to treat items and suppliers fairly and do not sufficiently explore the item space for each user. To mitigate this bias, we propose a discounting factor and incorporate it into these algorithms that controls the exposure of items at each time step. To show the effectiveness of the proposed discounting factor on mitigating exposure bias, we perform experiments on two datasets using three cascading bandit algorithms and our experimental results show that the proposed method improves the exposure fairness for items and suppliers.

A Graph-based Approach for Mitigating Multi-sided Exposure Bias in Recommender Systems

Fairness is a critical system-level objective in recommender systems that has been the subject of extensive recent research. A specific form of fairness is supplier exposure fairness where the objective is to ensure equitable coverage of items across all suppliers in recommendations provided to users. This is especially important in multistakeholder recommendation scenarios where it may be important to optimize utilities not just for the end-user, but also for other stakeholders such as item sellers or producers who desire a fair representation of their items. This type of supplier fairness is sometimes accomplished by attempting to increasing aggregate diversity in order to mitigate popularity bias and to improve the coverage of long-tail items in recommendations. In this paper, we introduce FairMatch, a general graph-based algorithm that works as a post processing approach after recommendation generation to improve exposure fairness for items and suppliers. The algorithm iteratively adds high quality items that have low visibility or items from suppliers with low exposure to the users' final recommendation lists. A comprehensive set of experiments on two datasets and comparison with state-of-the-art baselines show that FairMatch, while significantly improves exposure fairness and aggregate diversity, maintains an acceptable level of relevance of the recommendations.

Evaluating Team Skill Aggregation in Online Competitive Games

One of the main goals of online competitive games is increasing player engagement by ensuring fair matches. These games use rating systems for creating balanced match-ups. Rating systems leverage statistical estimation to rate players' skills and use skill ratings to predict rank before matching players. Skill ratings of individual players can be aggregated to compute the skill level of a team. While research often aims to improve the accuracy of skill estimation and fairness of match-ups, less attention has been given to how the skill level of a team is calculated from the skill level of its members. In this paper, we propose two new aggregation methods and compare them with a standard approach extensively used in the research literature. We present an exhaustive analysis of the impact of these methods on the predictive performance of rating systems. We perform our experiments using three popular rating systems, Elo, Glicko, and TrueSkill, on three real-world datasets including over 100,000 battle royale and head-to-head matches. Our evaluations show the superiority of the MAX method over the other two methods in the majority of the tested cases, implying that the overall performance of a team is best determined by the performance of its most skilled member. The results of this study highlight the necessity of devising more elaborated methods for calculating a team's performance -- methods covering different aspects of players' behavior such as skills, strategy, or goals.

The Evaluation of Rating Systems in Team-based Battle Royale Games

Online competitive games have become a mainstream entertainment platform. To create a fair and exciting experience, these games use rating systems to match players with similar skills. While there has been an increasing amount of research on improving the performance of these systems, less attention has been paid to how their performance is evaluated. In this paper, we explore the utility of several metrics for evaluating three popular rating systems on a real-world dataset of over 25,000 team battle royale matches. Our results suggest considerable differences in their evaluation patterns. Some metrics were highly impacted by the inclusion of new players. Many could not capture the real differences between certain groups of players. Among all metrics studied, normalized discounted cumulative gain (NDCG) demonstrated more reliable performance and more flexibility. It alleviated most of the challenges faced by the other metrics while adding the freedom to adjust the focus of the evaluations on different groups of players.