Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3539618.3591714acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesirConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Learning to Re-rank with Constrained Meta-Optimal Transport

Published: 18 July 2023 Publication History
  • Get Citation Alerts
  • Abstract

    Many re-ranking strategies in search systems rely on stochastic ranking policies, encoded as Doubly-Stochastic (DS) matrices, that satisfy desired ranking constraints in expectation, e.g., Fairness of Exposure (FOE). These strategies are generally two-stage pipelines: (i) an offline re-ranking policy construction step and (ii) an online sampling of rankings step. Building a re-ranking policy requires repeatedly solving a constrained optimization problem, one for each issued query. Thus, it is necessary to recompute the optimization procedure for any new/unseen query. Regarding sampling, the Birkhoff-von-Neumann decomposition (BvND) is the favored approach to draw rankings from any DS-based policy. Nonetheless, the BvND is too costly to compute online. Hence, the BvND as a sampling solution is memory-consuming as it can grow as O(N n2) for N queries and n documents.
    This paper proposes a novel, fast, lightweight way to predict fair stochastic re-ranking policies: Constrained Meta-Optimal Transport (CoMOT). This method fits a neural network shared across queries like a learning-to-rank system. We also introduce Gumbel-Matching Sampling (GumMS), an online sampling approach from DS-based policies. Our proposed pipeline, CoMOT + GumMS, only needs to store the parameters of a single model, and it can generalize to unseen queries. We empirically evaluated our pipeline on the TREC 2019 and 2020 datasets under FOE constraints. Our experiments show that CoMOT rapidly predicts fair re-ranking policies on held-out data, with a speed-up proportional to the average number of documents per query. It also displays fairness and ranking performance similar to the original optimization-based policy. Furthermore, we empirically validate the effectiveness of GumMS to approximate DS-based policies in expectation. Together, our methods are an important step in learning-to-predict solutions to optimization problems in information retrieval.

    References

    [1]
    Himan Abdollahpouri. 2019. Popularity bias in ranking and recommendation. In AAAI. 529--530.
    [2]
    Ryan Prescott Adams and Richard S Zemel. 2011. Ranking via sinkhorn propagation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1106.1925 (2011).
    [3]
    Aman Agarwal, Kenta Takatsu, Ivan Zaitsev, and Thorsten Joachims. 2019. A general framework for counterfactual learning-to-rank. In ACM SIGIR. 5--14.
    [4]
    Brandon Amos. 2022. Tutorial on amortized optimization for learning to optimize over continuous domains. arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.00665 (2022).
    [5]
    Brandon Amos, Samuel Cohen, Giulia Luise, and Ievgen Redko. 2022. Meta optimal transport. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.05262 (2022).
    [6]
    Abolfazl Asudeh, HV Jagadish, Julia Stoyanovich, and Gautam Das. 2019. Designing fair ranking schemes. In SIGMOD. 1259--1276.
    [7]
    Asia J Biega, Krishna P Gummadi, and Gerhard Weikum. 2018. Equity of attention: Amortizing individual fairness in rankings. In ACM SIGIR. 405--414.
    [8]
    Garrett Birkhoff. 1940. Lattice theory. Vol. 25. American Mathematical Soc.
    [9]
    Garrett Birkhoff. 1946. Tres observaciones sobre el algebra lineal. Univ. Nac. Tucuman, Ser. A, Vol. 5 (1946), 147--154.
    [10]
    Sebastian Bruch, Shuguang Han, Michael Bendersky, and Marc Najork. 2020. A stochastic treatment of learning to rank scoring functions. In ACM WSDM. 61--69.
    [11]
    Zhe Cao, Tao Qin, Tie-Yan Liu, Ming-Feng Tsai, and Hang Li. 2007. Learning to rank: from pairwise approach to listwise approach. In ICML. 129--136.
    [12]
    L Elisa Celis, Damian Straszak, and Nisheeth K Vishnoi. 2017. Ranking with fairness constraints. arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.06840 (2017).
    [13]
    Olivier Chapelle and Ya Zhang. 2009. A dynamic bayesian network click model for web search ranking. In WWW. 1--10.
    [14]
    Kate Crawford. 2017. The trouble with bias. In NeurIPS, invited speaker.
    [15]
    Marco Cuturi. 2013. Sinkhorn distances: Lightspeed computation of optimal transport. NeurIPS, Vol. 26 (2013).
    [16]
    Marco Cuturi, Olivier Teboul, and Jean-Philippe Vert. 2019. Differentiable ranking and sorting using optimal transport. NeurIPS, Vol. 32 (2019).
    [17]
    Steven Diamond and Stephen Boyd. 2016. CVXPY: A Python-embedded modeling language for convex optimization. JMLR, Vol. 17, 83 (2016), 1--5.
    [18]
    Fernando Diaz, Bhaskar Mitra, Michael D Ekstrand, Asia J Biega, and Ben Carterette. 2020. Evaluating stochastic rankings with expected exposure. In ACM CIKM. 275--284.
    [19]
    Virginie Do and Nicolas Usunier. 2022. Optimizing generalized Gini indices for fairness in rankings. ACM SIGIR (2022), 737--747.
    [20]
    Fanny Dufossé, Kamer Kaya, Ioannis Panagiotas, and Bora Uçar. 2018. Further notes on Birkhoff--von Neumann decomposition of doubly stochastic matrices. Linear Algebra Appl., Vol. 554 (2018), 68--78.
    [21]
    Fanny Dufossé and Bora Ucc ar. 2016. Notes on Birkhoff--von Neumann decomposition of doubly stochastic matrices. Linear Algebra Appl., Vol. 497 (2016), 108--115.
    [22]
    Michael D Ekstrand, Anubrata Das, Robin Burke, Fernando Diaz, et al. 2022. Fairness in information access systems. Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval, Vol. 16, 1--2 (2022), 1--177.
    [23]
    Rémi Flamary, Nicolas Courty, Alexandre Gramfort, Mokhtar Z. Alaya, Aurélie Boisbunon, Stanislas Chambon, Laetitia Chapel, Adrien Corenflos, Kilian Fatras, Nemo Fournier, Léo Gautheron, Nathalie T.H. Gayraud, Hicham Janati, Alain Rakotomamonjy, Ievgen Redko, Antoine Rolet, Antony Schutz, Vivien Seguy, Danica J. Sutherland, Romain Tavenard, Alexander Tong, and Titouan Vayer. 2021. POT: Python Optimal Transport. JMLR, Vol. 22, 78 (2021), 1--8. http://jmlr.org/papers/v22/20-451.html
    [24]
    Batya Friedman and Helen Nissenbaum. 1996. Bias in computer systems. ACM TOIS, Vol. 14, 3 (1996), 330--347.
    [25]
    Andreea Gane, Tamir Hazan, and Tommi Jaakkola. 2014. Learning with maximum a-posteriori perturbation models. In AISTATS. PMLR, 247--256.
    [26]
    Ruoyuan Gao and Chirag Shah. 2020. Toward creating a fairer ranking in search engine results. Information Processing & Management, Vol. 57, 1 (2020), 102138.
    [27]
    Maria Heuss, Fatemeh Sarvi, and Maarten de Rijke. 2022. Fairness of Exposure in Light of Incomplete Exposure Estimation. ACM SIGIR (2022), 759--769.
    [28]
    Rolf Jagerman and Maarten de Rijke. 2020. Accelerated Convergence for Counterfactual Learning to Rank. In ACM SIGIR. 469--478.
    [29]
    Eric Jang, Shixiang Gu, and Ben Poole. 2017. Categorical reparameterization with gumbel-softmax. ICLR (2017).
    [30]
    Thorsten Joachims. 2002. Optimizing search engines using clickthrough data. In ACM SIGIR. 133--142.
    [31]
    Matthew Kay, Cynthia Matuszek, and Sean A Munson. 2015. Unequal representation and gender stereotypes in image search results for occupations. In CHI. 3819--3828.
    [32]
    Till Kletti, Jean-Michel Renders, and Patrick Loiseau. 2022. Introducing the Expohedron for Efficient Pareto-optimal Fairness-Utility Amortizations in Repeated Rankings. In ACM WSDM. 498--507.
    [33]
    James Kotary, Ferdinando Fioretto, Pascal Van Hentenryck, and Ziwei Zhu. 2022. End-to-End Learning for Fair Ranking Systems. In WWW. 3520--3530.
    [34]
    Harold W Kuhn. 1955. The Hungarian method for the assignment problem. Naval research logistics quarterly, Vol. 2, 1--2 (1955), 83--97.
    [35]
    Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. 2018. Decoupled Weight Decay Regularization. In ICLR.
    [36]
    Chris J Maddison, Andriy Mnih, and Yee Whye Teh. 2017. The concrete distribution: A continuous relaxation of discrete random variables. ICLR (2017).
    [37]
    Gonzalo Mena, David Belanger, Scott Linderman, and Jasper Snoek. 2018. Learning latent permutations with gumbel-sinkhorn networks. ICLR (2018).
    [38]
    Harrie Oosterhuis. 2021. Computationally efficient optimization of plackett-luce ranking models for relevance and fairness. In ACM SIGIR. 1023--1032.
    [39]
    Sandeep Pandey, Sourashis Roy, Christopher Olston, Junghoo Cho, and Soumen Chakrabarti. 2005. Shuffling a Stacked Deck: The Case for Partially Randomized Ranking of Search Engine Results. In VLDB. 781--792.
    [40]
    Rama Kumar Pasumarthi, Honglei Zhuang, Xuanhui Wang, Michael Bendersky, and Marc Najork. 2020. Permutation equivariant document interaction network for neural learning to rank. In ACM SIGIR. 145--148.
    [41]
    Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zeming Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, Alban Desmaison, Andreas Kopf, Edward Yang, Zachary DeVito, Martin Raison, Alykhan Tejani, Sasank Chilamkurthy, Benoit Steiner, Lu Fang, Junjie Bai, and Soumith Chintala. 2019. PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library. In NeurIPS. 8024--8035.
    [42]
    Gabriel Peyré, Marco Cuturi, et al. 2019. Computational optimal transport: With applications to data science. Foundations and Trends® in Machine Learning, Vol. 11, 5--6 (2019), 355--607.
    [43]
    Przemysław Pobrotyn, Tomasz Bartczak, Mikołaj Synowiec, Radosław Białobrzeski, and Jarosław Bojar. 2020. Context-aware learning to rank with self-attention. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.10084 (2020).
    [44]
    Zhen Qin, Le Yan, Honglei Zhuang, Yi Tay, Rama Kumar Pasumarthi, Xuanhui Wang, Michael Bendersky, and Marc Najork. 2020. Are Neural Rankers still Outperformed by Gradient Boosted Decision Trees?. In ICLR.
    [45]
    Filip Radlinski, Robert Kleinberg, and Thorsten Joachims. 2008. Learning diverse rankings with multi-armed bandits. In ICML. 784--791.
    [46]
    Stephen Robertson, Hugo Zaragoza, et al. 2009. The probabilistic relevance framework: BM25 and beyond. Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval, Vol. 3, 4 (2009), 333--389.
    [47]
    Fatemeh Sarvi, Maria Heuss, Mohammad Aliannejadi, Sebastian Schelter, and Maarten de Rijke. 2022. Understanding and Mitigating the Effect of Outliers in Fair Ranking. In ACM WSDM. 861--869.
    [48]
    Ashudeep Singh and Thorsten Joachims. 2018. Fairness of exposure in rankings. In ACM SIGIR. 2219--2228.
    [49]
    Ashudeep Singh and Thorsten Joachims. 2019. Policy learning for fairness in ranking. NeurIPS, Vol. 32 (2019).
    [50]
    Ashudeep Singh, David Kempe, and Thorsten Joachims. 2021. Fairness in ranking under uncertainty. NeurIPS, Vol. 34 (2021), 11896--11908.
    [51]
    Richard Sinkhorn and Paul Knopp. 1967. Concerning nonnegative matrices and doubly stochastic matrices. Pacific J. Math., Vol. 21, 2 (1967), 343--348.
    [52]
    Yi Su, Magd Bayoumi, and Thorsten Joachims. 2022. Optimizing Rankings for Recommendation in Matching Markets. In WWW. 328--338.
    [53]
    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. NeurIPS, Vol. 30 (2017).
    [54]
    Paul Vicol, Jonathan Lorraine, David Duvenaud, and Roger Grosse. 2021. Implicit Regularization in Overparameterized Bilevel Optimization. In ICML.
    [55]
    Lequn Wang and Thorsten Joachims. 2021. User Fairness, Item Fairness, and Diversity for Rankings in Two-Sided Markets. In ACM SIGIR. 23--41.
    [56]
    Xuanhui Wang, Cheng Li, Nadav Golbandi, Michael Bendersky, and Marc Najork. 2018. The lambdaloss framework for ranking metric optimization. In ACM CIKM. 1313--1322.
    [57]
    Haolun Wu, Bhaskar Mitra, Chen Ma, Fernando Diaz, and Xue Liu. 2022. Joint Multisided Exposure Fairness for Recommendation. ACM SIGIR (2022), 703--714.
    [58]
    Omry Yadan. 2019. Hydra - A framework for elegantly configuring complex applications. Github. https://github.com/facebookresearch/hydra
    [59]
    Himank Yadav, Zhengxiao Du, and Thorsten Joachims. 2021. Policy-gradient training of fair and unbiased ranking functions. In ACM SIGIR. 1044--1053.
    [60]
    Meike Zehlike, Francesco Bonchi, Carlos Castillo, Sara Hajian, Mohamed Megahed, and Ricardo Baeza-Yates. 2017. Fa*ir: A fair top-k ranking algorithm. In ACM CIKM. 1569--1578.
    [61]
    Meike Zehlike and Carlos Castillo. 2020. Reducing disparate exposure in ranking: A learning to rank approach. In WWW. 2849--2855.

    Index Terms

    1. Learning to Re-rank with Constrained Meta-Optimal Transport

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SIGIR '23: Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval
      July 2023
      3567 pages
      ISBN:9781450394086
      DOI:10.1145/3539618
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 18 July 2023

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. fairness in rankings
      2. fairness of exposure
      3. optimal transport

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Conference

      SIGIR '23
      Sponsor:

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate 792 of 3,983 submissions, 20%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • 0
        Total Citations
      • 154
        Total Downloads
      • Downloads (Last 12 months)154
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)6

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      View Options

      Get Access

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media