Measuring Fairness in Ranked Results (original) (raw)

Fair ranking: a critical review, challenges, and future directions

2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency

Ranking, recommendation, and retrieval systems are widely used in online platforms and other societal systems, including e-commerce, media-streaming, admissions, gig platforms, and hiring. In the recent past, a large "fair ranking" research literature has been developed around making these systems fair to the individuals, providers, or content that are being ranked. Most of this literature defines fairness for a single instance of retrieval, or as a simple additive notion for multiple instances of retrievals over time. This work provides a critical overview of this literature, detailing the often context-specific concerns that such approaches miss: the gap between high ranking placements and true provider utility, spillovers and compounding effects over time, induced strategic incentives, and the effect of statistical uncertainty. We then provide a path forward for a more holistic and impact-oriented fair ranking research agenda, including methodological lessons from other fields and the role of the broader stakeholder community in overcoming data bottlenecks and designing effective regulatory environments.

FAIR: Fairness-Aware Information Retrieval Evaluation

2021

With the emerging needs of creating fairness-aware solutions for search and recommendation systems, a daunting challenge exists of evaluating such solutions. While many of the traditional information retrieval (IR) metrics can capture the relevance, diversity and novelty for the utility with respect to users, they are not suitable for inferring whether the presented results are fair from the perspective of responsible information exposure. On the other hand, various fairness metrics have been proposed but they do not account for the user utility or do not measure it adequately. To address this problem, we propose a new metric called Fairness-Aware IR (FAIR). By unifying standard IR metrics and fairness measures into an integrated metric, this metric offers a new perspective for evaluating fairness-aware ranking results. Based on this metric, we developed an effective ranking algorithm that jointly optimized user utility and fairness. The experimental results showed that our FAIR met...

Scalable Assessment and Mitigation Strategies for Fairness in Rankings

ArXiv, 2020

Motivated by industrial-scale applications, we consider two specific areas of fairness, one connected to the notion of equality of opportunity, and the other one generally tied to fair model performance. Throughout the paper, we consider only methods that can be scaled to Internet-industry size datasets. With this in mind, we propose a simple post-processing method to achieve equality of opportunity and discuss challenges and some solutions in the specific cases of recommendation systems and rankings. We then discuss a class of model performance fairness measures based on conditional ROC curves. We propose both scalable uncertainty assessment tools (that improve upon recent research) as well as scalable penalized methods to improve fairness with respect to these metrics. We provide fast algorithms with an emphasis on making few passes over the data when possible.

Designing Fair Ranking Schemes

Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Management of Data - SIGMOD '19, 2019

Items from a database are often ranked based on a combination of multiple criteria. A user may have the flexibility to accept combinations that weigh these criteria differently, within limits. On the other hand, this choice of weights can greatly affect the fairness of the produced ranking. In this paper, we develop a system that helps users choose criterion weights that lead to greater fairness. We consider ranking functions that compute the score of each item as a weighted sum of (numeric) attribute values, and then sort items on their score. Each ranking function can be expressed as a vector of weights, or as a point in a multi-dimensional space. For a broad range of fairness criteria, we show how to efficiently identify regions in this space that satisfy these criteria. Using this identification method, our system is able to tell users whether their proposed ranking function satisfies the desired fairness criteria and, if it does not, to suggest the smallest modification that does. We develop user-controllable approximation that and indexing techniques that are applied during preprocessing, and support sub-second response times during the online phase. Our extensive experiments on real datasets demonstrate that our methods are able to find solutions that satisfy fairness criteria effectively and efficiently.

Fairness in Information Access Systems

2021

Recommendation, information retrieval, and other information access systems pose unique challenges for investigating and applying the fairness and non-discrimination concepts that have been developed for studying other machine learning systems. While fair information access shares many commonalities with fair classification, the multistakeholder nature of information access applications, the rank-based problem setting, the centrality of personalization in many cases, and the role of user response complicate the problem of identifying precisely what types and operationalizations of fairness may be relevant, let alone measuring or promoting them. In this monograph, we present a taxonomy of the various dimensions of fair information access and survey the literature to date on this new and rapidly-growing topic. We preface this with brief introductions to information access and algorithmic fairness, to facilitate use of this work by scholars with experience in one (or neither) of these ...

Facets of Fairness in Search and Recommendation

Communications in Computer and Information Science, 2020

Several recent works have highlighted how search and recommender systems exhibit bias along different dimensions. Counteracting this bias and bringing a certain amount of fairness in search is crucial to not only creating a more balanced environment that considers relevance and diversity but also providing a more sustainable way forward for both content consumers and content producers. This short paper examines some of the recent works to define relevance, diversity, and related concepts. Then, it focuses on explaining the emerging concept of fairness in various recommendation settings. In doing so, this paper presents comparisons and highlights contracts among various measures, and gaps in our conceptual and evaluative frameworks.

Fairness and Discrimination in Information Access Systems

2021

Recommendation, information retrieval, and other information access systems pose unique challenges for investigating and applying the fairness and non-discrimination concepts that have been developed for studying other machine learning systems. While fair information access shares many commonalities with fair classi€cation, the multistakeholder nature of information access applications, the rank-based problem se‹ing, the centrality of personalization in many cases, and the role of user response complicate the problem of identifying precisely what types and operationalizations of fairness may be relevant, let alone measuring or promoting them. In this monograph, we present a taxonomy of the various dimensions of fair information access and survey the literature to date on this new and rapidly-growing topic. We preface this with brief introductions to information access and algorithmic fairness, to facilitate use of this work by scholars with experience in one (or neither) of these €e...

Ranking for Individual and Group Fairness Simultaneously

ArXiv, 2020

Search and recommendation systems, such as search engines, recruiting tools, online marketplaces, news, and social media, output ranked lists of content, products, and sometimes, people. Credit ratings, standardized tests, risk assessments output only a score, but are also used implicitly for ranking. Bias in such ranking systems, especially among the top ranks, can worsen social and economic inequalities, polarize opinions, and reinforce stereotypes. On the other hand, a bias correction for minority groups can cause more harm if perceived as favoring group-fair outcomes over meritocracy. In this paper, we study a trade-off between individual fairness and group fairness in ranking. We define individual fairness based on how close the predicted rank of each item is to its true rank, and prove a lower bound on the trade-off achievable for simultaneous individual and group fairness in ranking. We give a fair ranking algorithm that takes any given ranking and outputs another ranking wit...

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

User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 2021

One 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 cluster.

Fairness in Recommendation Ranking through Pairwise Comparisons

Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining

Recommender systems are one of the most pervasive applications of machine learning in industry, with many services using them to match users to products or information. As such it is important to ask: what are the possible fairness risks, how can we quantify them, and how should we address them? In this paper we offer a set of novel metrics for evaluating algorithmic fairness concerns in recommender systems. In particular we show how measuring fairness based on pairwise comparisons from randomized experiments provides a tractable means to reason about fairness in rankings from recommender systems. Building on this metric, we offer a new regularizer to encourage improving this metric during model training and thus improve fairness in the resulting rankings. We apply this pairwise regularization to a large-scale, production recommender system and show that we are able to significantly improve the system's pairwise fairness.