Olivier Jeunen, T. Joachims, Harrie Oosterhuis, Yuta Saito, Flavian Vasile
{"title":"结果——推荐系统的因果关系、反事实和顺序决策","authors":"Olivier Jeunen, T. Joachims, Harrie Oosterhuis, Yuta Saito, Flavian Vasile","doi":"10.1145/3523227.3547409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recommender systems are more and more often modelled as repeated decision making processes – deciding which (ranking of) items to recommend to a given user. Each decision to recommend or rank an item has a significant impact on immediate and future user responses, long-term satisfaction or engagement with the system, and possibly valuable exposure for the item provider. This interactive and interventionist view of the recommender uncovers a plethora of unanswered research questions, as it complicates the typically adopted offline evaluation or learning procedures in the field. We need an understanding of causal inference to reason about (possibly unintended) consequences of the recommender, and a notion of counterfactuals to answer common “what if”-type questions in learning and evaluation. Advances at the intersection of these fields can foster progress in effective, efficient and fair learning and evaluation from logged data. These topics have been emerging in the Recommender Systems community for a while, but we firmly believe in the value of a dedicated forum and place to learn and exchange ideas. We welcome contributions from both academia and industry and bring together a growing community of researchers and practitioners interested in sequential decision making, offline evaluation, batch policy learning, fairness in online platforms, as well as other related tasks, such as A/B testing.","PeriodicalId":443279,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"CONSEQUENCES — Causality, Counterfactuals and Sequential Decision-Making for Recommender Systems\",\"authors\":\"Olivier Jeunen, T. Joachims, Harrie Oosterhuis, Yuta Saito, Flavian Vasile\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3523227.3547409\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recommender systems are more and more often modelled as repeated decision making processes – deciding which (ranking of) items to recommend to a given user. Each decision to recommend or rank an item has a significant impact on immediate and future user responses, long-term satisfaction or engagement with the system, and possibly valuable exposure for the item provider. This interactive and interventionist view of the recommender uncovers a plethora of unanswered research questions, as it complicates the typically adopted offline evaluation or learning procedures in the field. We need an understanding of causal inference to reason about (possibly unintended) consequences of the recommender, and a notion of counterfactuals to answer common “what if”-type questions in learning and evaluation. Advances at the intersection of these fields can foster progress in effective, efficient and fair learning and evaluation from logged data. These topics have been emerging in the Recommender Systems community for a while, but we firmly believe in the value of a dedicated forum and place to learn and exchange ideas. We welcome contributions from both academia and industry and bring together a growing community of researchers and practitioners interested in sequential decision making, offline evaluation, batch policy learning, fairness in online platforms, as well as other related tasks, such as A/B testing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":443279,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3523227.3547409\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3523227.3547409","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
CONSEQUENCES — Causality, Counterfactuals and Sequential Decision-Making for Recommender Systems
Recommender systems are more and more often modelled as repeated decision making processes – deciding which (ranking of) items to recommend to a given user. Each decision to recommend or rank an item has a significant impact on immediate and future user responses, long-term satisfaction or engagement with the system, and possibly valuable exposure for the item provider. This interactive and interventionist view of the recommender uncovers a plethora of unanswered research questions, as it complicates the typically adopted offline evaluation or learning procedures in the field. We need an understanding of causal inference to reason about (possibly unintended) consequences of the recommender, and a notion of counterfactuals to answer common “what if”-type questions in learning and evaluation. Advances at the intersection of these fields can foster progress in effective, efficient and fair learning and evaluation from logged data. These topics have been emerging in the Recommender Systems community for a while, but we firmly believe in the value of a dedicated forum and place to learn and exchange ideas. We welcome contributions from both academia and industry and bring together a growing community of researchers and practitioners interested in sequential decision making, offline evaluation, batch policy learning, fairness in online platforms, as well as other related tasks, such as A/B testing.