arXiv subjects

Robin Burke

Publications and source records attributed to Robin Burke.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Why didn't more people see it? Recommendation: Transparency for providers

Transparency in recommender systems has been widely studied from the perspective of those receiving recommendations, yet the needs of item providers, the creators whose content is distributed through these platforms, remain largely unexplored. Providers often lack insight into how their items do or do not receive exposure in users' recommendation lists. In this work, we address this gap by proposing a surrogate modeling approach to explain item exposure at a system level. Rather than explaining individual user-item pairs, we train a proxy model to approximate the exposure distribution produced by a recommender. By quantifying the contribution of each feature, we seek to explain the factors driving the recommendation model's decisions across the entire user base. We evaluate our approach on two datasets and three recommendation models. Results show that the surrogate model captures the global behavior of all three recommenders with high fidelity and that the most influential factors vary meaningfully across models and domains.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

Why This, Not That? Mining User Profiles for Pair-wise Counterfactuals

The topic of explanation in recommender systems has seen steady research attention since the earliest days of the field. With some exceptions, this work has focused on the explanation of single items in a recommendation list and, especially recently, has emphasized approaches that are decoupled from the logic of the recommendation algorithm itself. Based on findings in the psychology of interpersonal communication, we propose a new task, pairwise interpretation of item rankings, asking the comparative question ``Why is item A ranked higher than item B?''. An effective solution to this task, we argue, is inherently grounded in the operation of the recommendation algorithm. We propose a class of techniques based on counterfactual learning to uncover the items in a user's profile that have contributed to the relative ranking of items. Using multiple datasets, we show that it is possible to identify such items as potential basis for comparative explanation.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

Co-Designing Organizational Justice Indicators for Algorithmic Systems

Fairness in machine learning is often conceptualized narrowly in comparative, distributional terms. In studying stakeholders' concepts of fairness, we find that this framing is insufficient to capture the full range of issues raised. As an alternative, we propose organizational justice as a framework that subsumes distributional fairness as well as other normative concerns. We conduct a case study of organizational justice relative to personalized recommendation in the context of Kiva Microfunds, a nonprofit micro-lending organization whose mission is to increase financial access for underserved communities across the world. We report on the results of co-design workshops conducted with Kiva employees who are involved in different departments and whose roles often lead them to prioritize normative concerns that are most supportive of the stakeholders with whom they work most closely. We apply organizational justice to understand design trade-offs among different normative goals stakeholders invoke. Based on these goals, we identify a suite of metrics that Kiva employees can use to monitor and assess the recommender system's impact on their organizational justice concerns and to seed discussions within the organization about appropriate configuration and deployment of this system in context.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Multistakeholder Impacts of Profile Portability in a Recommender Ecosystem

Optimizing outcomes for multiple stakeholders in recommender systems has historically focused on algorithmic interventions, such as developing multi-objective models or re-ranking results from existing algorithms. However, structural changes to the recommendation ecosystem itself remain understudied. This paper explores the implications of algorithmic pluralism (also known as "middleware" in the governance literature), in which recommendation algorithms are decoupled from platforms, enabling users to select their preferred algorithm. Prior simulation work demonstrates that algorithmic choice benefits niche consumers and providers. Yet this approach raises critical questions about user modeling in the context of data portability: when users switch algorithms, what happens to their data? Noting that multiple data portability regulations have emerged to strengthen user data ownership and control. We examine how such policies affect user models and stakeholders' outcomes in recommendation setting. Our findings reveal that data portability scenarios produce varying effects on user utility across different recommendation algorithms. We highlight key policy considerations and implications for designing equitable recommendation ecosystems.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2025

What News Recommendation Research Did (But Mostly Didn't) Teach Us About Building A News Recommender

One of the goals of recommender systems research is to provide insights and methods that can be used by practitioners to build real-world systems that deliver high-quality recommendations to actual people grounded in their genuine interests and needs. We report on our experience trying to apply the news recommendation literature to build POPROX, a live platform for news recommendation research, and reflect on the extent to which the current state of research supports system-building efforts. Our experience highlights several unexpected challenges encountered in building personalization features that are commonly found in products from news aggregators and publishers, and shows how those difficulties are connected to surprising gaps in the literature. Finally, we offer a set of lessons learned from building a live system with a persistent user base and highlight opportunities to make future news recommendation research more applicable and impactful in practice.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2025

Envy-Free but Still Unfair: Envy-Freeness Up To One Item (EF-1) in Personalized Recommendation

Envy-freeness and the relaxation to Envy-freeness up to one item (EF-1) have been used as fairness concepts in the economics, game theory, and social choice literatures since the 1960s, and have recently gained popularity within the recommendation systems communities. In this short position paper we will give an overview of envy-freeness and its use in economics and recommendation systems; and illustrate why envy is not appropriate to measure fairness for use in settings where personalization plays a role.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2025

Fairness for niche users and providers: algorithmic choice and profile portability

Ensuring fair outcomes for multiple stakeholders in recommender systems has been studied mostly in terms of algorithmic interventions: building new models with better fairness properties, or using reranking to improve outcomes from an existing algorithm. What has rarely been studied is structural changes in the recommendation ecosystem itself. Our work explores the fairness impact of algorithmic pluralism, the idea that the recommendation algorithm is decoupled from the platform through which users access content, enabling user choice in algorithms. Prior work using a simulation approach has shown that niche consumers and (especially) niche providers benefit from algorithmic choice. In this paper, we use simulation to explore the question of profile portability, to understand how different policies regarding the handling of user profiles interact with fairness outcomes for consumers and providers.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2025

Recommending With, Not For: Co-Designing Recommender Systems for Social Good

Recommender systems are usually designed by engineers, researchers, designers, and other members of development teams. These systems are then evaluated based on goals set by the aforementioned teams and other business units of the platforms operating the recommender systems. This design approach emphasizes the designers' vision for how the system can best serve the interests of users, providers, businesses, and other stakeholders. Although designers may be well-informed about user needs through user experience and market research, they are still the arbiters of the system's design and evaluation, with other stakeholders' interests less emphasized in user-centered design and evaluation. When extended to recommender systems for social good, this approach results in systems that reflect the social objectives as envisioned by the designers and evaluated as the designers understand them. Instead, social goals and operationalizations should be developed through participatory and democratic processes that are accountable to their stakeholders. We argue that recommender systems aimed at improving social good should be designed *by* and *with*, not just *for*, the people who will experience their benefits and harms. That is, they should be designed in collaboration with their users, creators, and other stakeholders as full co-designers, not only as user study participants.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Decoupled Recommender Systems: Exploring Alternative Recommender Ecosystem Designs

Recommender ecosystems are an emerging subject of research. Such research examines how the characteristics of algorithms, recommendation consumers, and item providers influence system dynamics and long-term outcomes. One architectural possibility that has not yet been widely explored in this line of research is the consequences of a configuration in which recommendation algorithms are decoupled from the platforms they serve. This is sometimes called "the friendly neighborhood algorithm store" or "middleware" model. We are particularly interested in how such architectures might offer a range of different distributions of utility across consumers, providers, and recommendation platforms. In this paper, we create a model of a recommendation ecosystem that incorporates algorithm choice and examine the outcomes of such a design.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2025

De-centering the (Traditional) User: Multistakeholder Evaluation of Recommender Systems

Multistakeholder recommender systems are those that account for the impacts and preferences of multiple groups of individuals, not just the end users receiving recommendations. Due to their complexity, these systems cannot be evaluated strictly by the overall utility of a single stakeholder, as is often the case of more mainstream recommender system applications. In this article, we focus our discussion on the challenges of multistakeholder evaluation of recommender systems. We bring attention to the different aspects involved -- from the range of stakeholders involved (including but not limited to providers and consumers) to the values and specific goals of each relevant stakeholder. We discuss how to move from theoretical principles to practical implementation, providing specific use case examples. Finally, we outline open research directions for the RecSys community to explore. We aim to provide guidance to researchers and practitioners about incorporating these complex and domain-dependent issues of evaluation in the course of designing, developing, and researching applications with multistakeholder aspects.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Post-Userist Recommender Systems : A Manifesto

We define userist recommendation as an approach to recommender systems framed solely in terms of the relation between the user and system. Post-userist recommendation posits a larger field of relations in which stakeholders are embedded and distinguishes the recommendation function (which can potentially connect creators with audiences) from generative media. We argue that in the era of generative media, userist recommendation becomes indistinguishable from personalized media generation, and therefore post-userist recommendation is the only path forward for recommender systems research.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Social Choice for Heterogeneous Fairness in Recommendation

Algorithmic fairness in recommender systems requires close attention to the needs of a diverse set of stakeholders that may have competing interests. Previous work in this area has often been limited by fixed, single-objective definitions of fairness, built into algorithms or optimization criteria that are applied to a single fairness dimension or, at most, applied identically across dimensions. These narrow conceptualizations limit the ability to adapt fairness-aware solutions to the wide range of stakeholder needs and fairness definitions that arise in practice. Our work approaches recommendation fairness from the standpoint of computational social choice, using a multi-agent framework. In this paper, we explore the properties of different social choice mechanisms and demonstrate the successful integration of multiple, heterogeneous fairness definitions across multiple data sets.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

Data Generation via Latent Factor Simulation for Fairness-aware Re-ranking

Synthetic data is a useful resource for algorithmic research. It allows for the evaluation of systems under a range of conditions that might be difficult to achieve in real world settings. In recommender systems, the use of synthetic data is somewhat limited; some work has concentrated on building user-item interaction data at large scale. We believe that fairness-aware recommendation research can benefit from simulated data as it allows the study of protected groups and their interactions without depending on sensitive data that needs privacy protection. In this paper, we propose a novel type of data for fairness-aware recommendation: synthetic recommender system outputs that can be used to study re-ranking algorithms.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2023

Exploring Social Choice Mechanisms for Recommendation Fairness in SCRUF

Fairness problems in recommender systems often have a complexity in practice that is not adequately captured in simplified research formulations. A social choice formulation of the fairness problem, operating within a multi-agent architecture of fairness concerns, offers a flexible and multi-aspect alternative to fairness-aware recommendation approaches. Leveraging social choice allows for increased generality and the possibility of tapping into well-studied social choice algorithms for resolving the tension between multiple, competing fairness concerns. This paper explores a range of options for choice mechanisms in multi-aspect fairness applications using both real and synthetic data and shows that different classes of choice and allocation mechanisms yield different but consistent fairness / accuracy tradeoffs. We also show that a multi-agent formulation offers flexibility in adapting to user population dynamics.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2023

Dynamic fairness-aware recommendation through multi-agent social choice

Algorithmic fairness in the context of personalized recommendation presents significantly different challenges to those commonly encountered in classification tasks. Researchers studying classification have generally considered fairness to be a matter of achieving equality of outcomes between a protected and unprotected group, and built algorithmic interventions on this basis. We argue that fairness in real-world application settings in general, and especially in the context of personalized recommendation, is much more complex and multi-faceted, requiring a more general approach. We propose a model to formalize multistakeholder fairness in recommender systems as a two stage social choice problem. In particular, we express recommendation fairness as a novel combination of an allocation and an aggregation problem, which integrate both fairness concerns and personalized recommendation provisions, and derive new recommendation techniques based on this formulation. Simulations demonstrate the ability of the framework to integrate multiple fairness concerns in a dynamic way.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2022

Who Pays? Personalization, Bossiness and the Cost of Fairness

Fairness-aware recommender systems that have a provider-side fairness concern seek to ensure that protected group(s) of providers have a fair opportunity to promote their items or products. There is a ``cost of fairness'' borne by the consumer side of the interaction when such a solution is implemented. This consumer-side cost raises its own questions of fairness, particularly when personalization is used to control the impact of the fairness constraint. In adopting a personalized approach to the fairness objective, researchers may be opening their systems up to strategic behavior on the part of users. This type of incentive has been studied in the computational social choice literature under the terminology of ``bossiness''. The concern is that a bossy user may be able to shift the cost of fairness to others, improving their own outcomes and worsening those for others. This position paper introduces the concept of bossiness, shows its application in fairness-aware recommendation and discusses strategies for reducing this strategic incentive.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2022

Recommender Systems and Algorithmic Hate

Despite increasing reliance on personalization in digital platforms, many algorithms that curate content or information for users have been met with resistance. When users feel dissatisfied or harmed by recommendations, this can lead users to hate, or feel negatively towards these personalized systems. Algorithmic hate detrimentally impacts both users and the system, and can result in various forms of algorithmic harm, or in extreme cases can lead to public protests against ''the algorithm'' in question. In this work, we summarize some of the most common causes of algorithmic hate and their negative consequences through various case studies of personalized recommender systems. We explore promising future directions for the RecSys research community that could help alleviate algorithmic hate and improve the relationship between recommender systems and their users.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2021

Unbiased Cascade Bandits: Mitigating Exposure Bias in Online Learning to Rank Recommendation

Exposure bias is a well-known issue in recommender systems where items and suppliers are not equally represented in the recommendation results. This is especially problematic when bias is amplified over time as a few popular items are repeatedly over-represented in recommendation lists. This phenomenon can be viewed as a recommendation feedback loop: the system repeatedly recommends certain items at different time points and interactions of users with those items will amplify bias towards those items over time. This issue has been extensively studied in the literature on model-based or neighborhood-based recommendation algorithms, but less work has been done on online recommendation models such as those based on multi-armed Bandit algorithms. In this paper, we study exposure bias in a class of well-known bandit algorithms known as Linear Cascade Bandits. We analyze these algorithms on their ability to handle exposure bias and provide a fair representation for items and suppliers in the recommendation results. Our analysis reveals that these algorithms fail to treat items and suppliers fairly and do not sufficiently explore the item space for each user. To mitigate this bias, we propose a discounting factor and incorporate it into these algorithms that controls the exposure of items at each time step. To show the effectiveness of the proposed discounting factor on mitigating exposure bias, we perform experiments on two datasets using three cascading bandit algorithms and our experimental results show that the proposed method improves the exposure fairness for items and suppliers.

cs.IR↗