Abstract:Recommendation in settings such as e-recruitment and online dating involves distributing limited opportunities, which differs from recommending practically unlimited goods such as in e-commerce or music recommendation. This setting calls for novel approaches to quantify and enforce fairness. Indeed, typical recommender systems recommend each user their top relevant items, such that desirable items may be recommended simultaneously to more and to less qualified individuals. This is arguably unfair to the latter. Indeed, when they pursue such a desirable recommendation (e.g. by applying for a job), they are unlikely to be successful. To quantify fairness in such settings, we introduce inferiority : a novel (un)fairness measure that quantifies the competitive disadvantage of a user for their recommended items. Inferiority is complementary to envy : a previously-proposed fairness notion that quantifies the extent to which a user prefers other users’ recommendations over their own. We propose to use both inferiority and envy in combination with an accuracy-related measure called utility : the aggregated relevancy scores of the recommended items. Unfortunately, none of these three measures are differentiable, making it hard to optimize them, and restricting their immediate use to evaluation only. To remedy this, we reformulate them in the context of a probabilistic interpretation of recommender systems, resulting in differentiable versions. We show how these loss functions can be combined in a multi-objective optimization problem that we call FEIR (Fairness through Envy and Inferiority Reduction), used as a post-processing of the scores from any standard recommender system. Experiments on synthetic and real-world data show that the proposed approach effectively improves the trade-offs between inferiority, envy and utility, compared to the naive recommendation and the state of the art method for the related problem of congestion alleviation in job recommendation. We discuss and enhance the practical impact of our findings on a wide range of real-world recommendation scenarios, and we offer implementations of visualization tools to render the envy and inferiority metrics more accessible.

Make Fairness More Fair: Fair Item Utility Estimation and Exposure Re-Distribution

Configurable Fairness for New Item Recommendation Considering Entry Time of Items

FairRec: Fairness Testing for Deep Recommender Systems

Evaluation Measures of Individual Item Fairness for Recommender Systems: A Critical Study

Measuring Item Global Residual Value for Fair Recommendation

Joint Multisided Exposure Fairness for Recommendation

Causal Intervention for Fairness in Multi-behavior Recommendation

User-Item Matching for Recommendation Fairness

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

Towards Long-term Fairness in Recommendation

Interpolating Item and User Fairness in Multi-Sided Recommendations

Effective Exposure Amortizing for Fair Top-k Recommendation.

Explainable Fairness in Recommendation

FEIR: Quantifying and Reducing Envy and Inferiority for Fair Recommendation of Limited Resources

Contextualized Fairness for Recommender Systems in Premium Scenarios

A survey on fairness-aware recommender systems

User-oriented Fairness in Recommendation

A Survey on the Fairness of Recommender Systems

Maximum Entropy Policy for Long-Term Fairness in Interactive Recommender Systems

Fairly Recommending with Social Attributes: A Flexible and Controllable Optimization Approach.

Intersectional Two-sided Fairness in Recommendation