How Fair is Your Diffusion Recommender Model?

Daniele Malitesta, Giacomo Medda, Erasmo Purificato, Ludovico Boratto, Fragkiskos D. Malliaros, Mirko Marras, Ernesto William De Luca
{"title":"How Fair is Your Diffusion Recommender Model?","authors":"Daniele Malitesta, Giacomo Medda, Erasmo Purificato, Ludovico Boratto, Fragkiskos D. Malliaros, Mirko Marras, Ernesto William De Luca","doi":"arxiv-2409.04339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Diffusion-based recommender systems have recently proven to outperform\ntraditional generative recommendation approaches, such as variational\nautoencoders and generative adversarial networks. Nevertheless, the machine\nlearning literature has raised several concerns regarding the possibility that\ndiffusion models, while learning the distribution of data samples, may\ninadvertently carry information bias and lead to unfair outcomes. In light of\nthis aspect, and considering the relevance that fairness has held in\nrecommendations over the last few decades, we conduct one of the first fairness\ninvestigations in the literature on DiffRec, a pioneer approach in\ndiffusion-based recommendation. First, we propose an experimental setting\ninvolving DiffRec (and its variant L-DiffRec) along with nine state-of-the-art\nrecommendation models, two popular recommendation datasets from the\nfairness-aware literature, and six metrics accounting for accuracy and\nconsumer/provider fairness. Then, we perform a twofold analysis, one assessing\nmodels' performance under accuracy and recommendation fairness separately, and\nthe other identifying if and to what extent such metrics can strike a\nperformance trade-off. Experimental results from both studies confirm the\ninitial unfairness warnings but pave the way for how to address them in future\nresearch directions.","PeriodicalId":501281,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Information Retrieval","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Information Retrieval","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.04339","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Diffusion-based recommender systems have recently proven to outperform traditional generative recommendation approaches, such as variational autoencoders and generative adversarial networks. Nevertheless, the machine learning literature has raised several concerns regarding the possibility that diffusion models, while learning the distribution of data samples, may inadvertently carry information bias and lead to unfair outcomes. In light of this aspect, and considering the relevance that fairness has held in recommendations over the last few decades, we conduct one of the first fairness investigations in the literature on DiffRec, a pioneer approach in diffusion-based recommendation. First, we propose an experimental setting involving DiffRec (and its variant L-DiffRec) along with nine state-of-the-art recommendation models, two popular recommendation datasets from the fairness-aware literature, and six metrics accounting for accuracy and consumer/provider fairness. Then, we perform a twofold analysis, one assessing models' performance under accuracy and recommendation fairness separately, and the other identifying if and to what extent such metrics can strike a performance trade-off. Experimental results from both studies confirm the initial unfairness warnings but pave the way for how to address them in future research directions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
你的扩散推荐模型有多公平?
基于扩散的推荐系统最近被证明优于传统的生成式推荐方法,如变异自动编码器和生成式对抗网络。尽管如此,机器学习文献还是提出了一些担忧,即扩散模型在学习数据样本分布时,可能会无意中产生信息偏差,导致不公平的结果。有鉴于此,并考虑到过去几十年来公平性在推荐中的重要性,我们对基于扩散的推荐的先驱方法 DiffRec 进行了文献中首次公平性研究。首先,我们提出了一个实验环境,其中包括 DiffRec(及其变体 L-DiffRec)、九个最先进的推荐模型、两个来自公平感知文献的流行推荐数据集,以及六个衡量准确性和消费者/提供商公平性的指标。然后,我们进行了两方面的分析,一方面分别评估了模型在准确性和推荐公平性下的性能,另一方面确定了这些指标是否以及在多大程度上可以实现性能权衡。这两项研究的实验结果证实了最初的不公平警告,但也为如何在未来的研究方向中解决这些问题铺平了道路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Decoding Style: Efficient Fine-Tuning of LLMs for Image-Guided Outfit Recommendation with Preference Retrieve, Annotate, Evaluate, Repeat: Leveraging Multimodal LLMs for Large-Scale Product Retrieval Evaluation Active Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface Empowered Synthetic Aperture Radar Imaging FLARE: Fusing Language Models and Collaborative Architectures for Recommender Enhancement Basket-Enhanced Heterogenous Hypergraph for Price-Sensitive Next Basket Recommendation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1