Recommendation Fairness in Social Networks Over Time

In social recommender systems, it is crucial that the recommendation models provide equitable visibility for different demographic groups, such as gender or race. Most existing research has addressed this problem by only studying individual static snapshots of networks that typically change over time. To address this gap, we study the evolution of recommendation fairness over time and its relation to dynamic network properties. We examine three real-world dynamic networks by evaluating the fairness of six recommendation algorithms and analyzing the association between fairness and network properties over time. We further study how interventions on network properties influence fairness by examining counterfactual scenarios with alternative evolution outcomes and differing network properties. Our results on empirical datasets suggest that recommendation fairness improves over time, regardless of the recommendation method. We also find that two network properties, minority ratio, and homophily ratio, exhibit stable correlations with fairness over time. Our counterfactual study further suggests that an extreme homophily ratio potentially contributes to unfair recommendations even with a balanced minority ratio. Our work provides insights into the evolution of fairness within dynamic networks in social science. We believe that our findings will help system operators and policymakers to better comprehend the implications of temporal changes and interventions targeting fairness in social networks.

Similarity of Neural Network Models: A Survey of Functional and Representational Measures

Measuring similarity of neural networks has become an issue of great importance and research interest to understand and utilize differences of neural networks. While there are several perspectives on how neural networks can be similar, we specifically focus on two complementing perspectives, i.e., (i) representational similarity, which considers how activations of intermediate neural layers differ, and (ii) functional similarity, which considers how models differ in their outputs. In this survey, we provide a comprehensive overview of these two families of similarity measures for neural network models. In addition to providing detailed descriptions of existing measures, we summarize and discuss results on the properties and relationships of these measures, and point to open research problems. Further, we provide practical recommendations that can guide researchers as well as practitioners in applying the measures. We hope our work lays a foundation for our community to engage in more systematic research on the properties, nature and applicability of similarity measures for neural network models.

Toxic comments reduce the activity of volunteer editors on Wikipedia

Wikipedia is one of the most successful collaborative projects in history. It is the largest encyclopedia ever created, with millions of users worldwide relying on it as the first source of information as well as for fact-checking and in-depth research. As Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of its volunteer-editors, its success might be particularly affected by toxic speech. In this paper, we analyze all 57 million comments made on user talk pages of 8.5 million editors across the six most active language editions of Wikipedia to study the potential impact of toxicity on editors' behaviour. We find that toxic comments consistently reduce the activity of editors, leading to an estimated loss of 0.5-2 active days per user in the short term. This amounts to multiple human-years of lost productivity when considering the number of active contributors to Wikipedia. The effects of toxic comments are even greater in the long term, as they significantly increase the risk of editors leaving the project altogether. Using an agent-based model, we demonstrate that toxicity attacks on Wikipedia have the potential to impede the progress of the entire project. Our results underscore the importance of mitigating toxic speech on collaborative platforms such as Wikipedia to ensure their continued success.

SensePOLAR: Word sense aware interpretability for pre-trained contextual word embeddings

Adding interpretability to word embeddings represents an area of active research in text representation. Recent work has explored thepotential of embedding words via so-called polar dimensions (e.g. good vs. bad, correct vs. wrong). Examples of such recent approaches include SemAxis, POLAR, FrameAxis, and BiImp. Although these approaches provide interpretable dimensions for words, they have not been designed to deal with polysemy, i.e. they can not easily distinguish between different senses of words. To address this limitation, we present SensePOLAR, an extension of the original POLAR framework that enables word-sense aware interpretability for pre-trained contextual word embeddings. The resulting interpretable word embeddings achieve a level of performance that is comparable to original contextual word embeddings across a variety of natural language processing tasks including the GLUE and SQuAD benchmarks. Our work removes a fundamental limitation of existing approaches by offering users sense aware interpretations for contextual word embeddings.

Properties of Group Fairness Metrics for Rankings

In recent years, several metrics have been developed for evaluating group fairness of rankings. Given that these metrics were developed with different application contexts and ranking algorithms in mind, it is not straightforward which metric to choose for a given scenario. In this paper, we perform a comprehensive comparative analysis of existing group fairness metrics developed in the context of fair ranking. By virtue of their diverse application contexts, we argue that such a comparative analysis is not straightforward. Hence, we take an axiomatic approach whereby we design a set of thirteen properties for group fairness metrics that consider different ranking settings. A metric can then be selected depending on whether it satisfies all or a subset of these properties. We apply these properties on eleven existing group fairness metrics, and through both empirical and theoretical results we demonstrate that most of these metrics only satisfy a small subset of the proposed properties. These findings highlight limitations of existing metrics, and provide insights into how to evaluate and interpret different fairness metrics in practical deployment. The proposed properties can also assist practitioners in selecting appropriate metrics for evaluating fairness in a specific application.

Adversarial Inter-Group Link Injection Degrades the Fairness of Graph Neural Networks

We present evidence for the existence and effectiveness of adversarial attacks on graph neural networks (GNNs) that aim to degrade fairness. These attacks can disadvantage a particular subgroup of nodes in GNN-based node classification, where nodes of the underlying network have sensitive attributes, such as race or gender. We conduct qualitative and experimental analyses explaining how adversarial link injection impairs the fairness of GNN predictions. For example, an attacker can compromise the fairness of GNN-based node classification by injecting adversarial links between nodes belonging to opposite subgroups and opposite class labels. Our experiments on empirical datasets demonstrate that adversarial fairness attacks can significantly degrade the fairness of GNN predictions (attacks are effective) with a low perturbation rate (attacks are efficient) and without a significant drop in accuracy (attacks are deceptive). This work demonstrates the vulnerability of GNN models to adversarial fairness attacks. We hope our findings raise awareness about this issue in our community and lay a foundation for the future development of GNN models that are more robust to such attacks.

Minorities in networks and algorithms

In this chapter, we provide an overview of recent advances in data-driven and theory-informed complex models of social networks and their potential in understanding societal inequalities and marginalization. We focus on inequalities arising from networks and network-based algorithms and how they affect minorities. In particular, we examine how homophily and mixing biases shape large and small social networks, influence perception of minorities, and affect collaboration patterns. We also discuss dynamical processes on and of networks and the formation of norms and health inequalities. Additionally, we argue that network modeling is paramount for unveiling the effect of ranking and social recommendation algorithms on the visibility of minorities. Finally, we highlight the key challenges and future opportunities in this emerging research topic.

Structack: Structure-based Adversarial Attacks on Graph Neural Networks

Recent work has shown that graph neural networks (GNNs) are vulnerable to adversarial attacks on graph data. Common attack approaches are typically informed, i.e. they have access to information about node attributes such as labels and feature vectors. In this work, we study adversarial attacks that are uninformed, where an attacker only has access to the graph structure, but no information about node attributes. Here the attacker aims to exploit structural knowledge and assumptions, which GNN models make about graph data. In particular, literature has shown that structural node centrality and similarity have a strong influence on learning with GNNs. Therefore, we study the impact of centrality and similarity on adversarial attacks on GNNs. We demonstrate that attackers can exploit this information to decrease the performance of GNNs by focusing on injecting links between nodes of low similarity and, surprisingly, low centrality. We show that structure-based uninformed attacks can approach the performance of informed attacks, while being computationally more efficient. With our paper, we present a new attack strategy on GNNs that we refer to as Structack. Structack can successfully manipulate the performance of GNNs with very limited information while operating under tight computational constraints. Our work contributes towards building more robust machine learning approaches on graphs.

Redescription Model Mining

This paper introduces Redescription Model Mining, a novel approach to identify interpretable patterns across two datasets that share only a subset of attributes and have no common instances. In particular, Redescription Model Mining aims to find pairs of describable data subsets -- one for each dataset -- that induce similar exceptional models with respect to a prespecified model class. To achieve this, we combine two previously separate research areas: Exceptional Model Mining and Redescription Mining. For this new problem setting, we develop interestingness measures to select promising patterns, propose efficient algorithms, and demonstrate their potential on synthetic and real-world data. Uncovered patterns can hint at common underlying phenomena that manifest themselves across datasets, enabling the discovery of possible associations between (combinations of) attributes that do not appear in the same dataset.

A Comparative Evaluation of Quantification Methods

Quantification represents the problem of predicting class distributions in a given target set. It also represents a growing research field in supervised machine learning, for which a large variety of different algorithms has been proposed in recent years. However, a comprehensive empirical comparison of quantification methods that supports algorithm selection is not available yet. In this work, we close this research gap by conducting a thorough empirical performance comparison of 24 different quantification methods. To consider a broad range of different scenarios for binary as well as multiclass quantification settings, we carried out almost 3 million experimental runs on 40 data sets. We observe that no single algorithm generally outperforms all competitors, but identify a group of methods including the Median Sweep and the DyS framework that perform significantly better in binary settings. For the multiclass setting, we observe that a different, broad group of algorithms yields good performance, including the Generalized Probabilistic Adjusted Count, the readme method, the energy distance minimization method, the EM algorithm for quantification, and Friedman's method. More generally, we find that the performance on multiclass quantification is inferior to the results obtained in the binary setting. Our results can guide practitioners who intend to apply quantification algorithms and help researchers to identify opportunities for future research.