Abstract:We explore the vicious cycle of bias on the Web related to search and recommender systems. The first bias is activity bias [1], called by Nielsen participation inequality in Internet [3]. This means that when sampling content, data will have many different types of bias such as gender, language, topic, etc. During the design and implementation of the system, biases might be added, and we call those the true algorithmic bias. In addition, when evaluating the system we may have been biased and hence that may also be reflected in algorithmic bias. The design of the interaction also matters, adding several other biases. All of them affect the data that is gathered for optimizing and personalizing the system [1]. Finally, our own cognitive biases also taint the interaction data, including confirmation bias and other behavioral biases. In all these cases we may need to debias the input data, to use techniques that can handle biased data (e.g., machine learning algorithms tailored for that), or debias the output (when we have already lost information). Most systems are optimized by using implicit user feedback, that is, clicks or other trackable user interactions. However, those interactions are biased to the choices that such systems offer to their users, as clicks can only be done on things that are shown to us. Hence, these feedback loops are tainted by presentation or exposure bias [1]. The most well-known problem related to this bias is called the filter bubble [4] or the echo chamber effect. Solutions to this problem include the explore and exploit paradigm (e.g., learning the world), diversity, novelty, and serendipity. Depending on the exploration technique, the bubble is smaller or bigger [2]. On the other hand, too much exploration also reduces short-term revenue and hence is usually bounded. However, we believe that recommender systems could improve their long-term revenue if significantly more exploration is performed, probably diminishing at the same time the tension between user experience and monetization. This is good for the recommender system but also creates more fair and healthy digital markets for everyone, users and publishers/sellers.

A Study of Symbiosis Bias in A/B Tests of Recommendation Algorithms

An Improved Network-Based Recommendation Model Via Inhibiting Algorithm Bias

Bias Disparity in Collaborative Recommendation: Algorithmic Evaluation and Comparison

Detecting Sponsored Recommendations

Retention Induced Biases in a Recommendation System with Heterogeneous Users

Alleviating Bias Leads to Accurate and Personalized Recommendation

The Importance of Cognitive Biases in the Recommendation Ecosystem

A Bias Study and an Unbiased Deep Neural Network for Recommender Systems

Balancing Unobserved Confounding with a Few Unbiased Ratings in Debiased Recommendations

A/B Testing for Recommender Systems in a Two-sided Marketplace

Bias in Search and Recommender Systems

Combating Selection Biases in Recommender Systems with a Few Unbiased Ratings

Debias Can be Unreliable: Mitigating Bias Issue in Evaluating Debiasing Recommendation

Self-Sampling Training and Evaluation for the Accuracy-Bias Tradeoff in Recommendation

On the challenges of studying bias in Recommender Systems: A UserKNN case study

Modeling and Counteracting Exposure Bias in Recommender Systems

Recommendations as Treatments: Debiasing Learning and Evaluation

Augmenting team diversity and performance by enabling agency and fairness criteria in recommendation algorithms

On the Fairness of Randomized Trials for Recommendation with Heterogeneous Demographics and Beyond

A/B testing under Interference with Partial Network Information

Reconsidering Learning Objectives in Unbiased Recommendation with Unobserved Confounders