Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3488560.3498441acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswsdmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Understanding and Mitigating the Effect of Outliers in Fair Ranking

Published: 15 February 2022 Publication History
  • Get Citation Alerts
  • Abstract

    Traditional ranking systems are expected to sort items in the order of their relevance and thereby maximize their utility. In fair ranking, utility is complemented with fairness as an optimization goal. Recent work on fair ranking focuses on developing algorithms to optimize for fairness, given position-based exposure. In contrast, we identify the potential of outliers in a ranking to influence exposure and thereby negatively impact fairness. An outlier in a list of items can alter the examination probabilities, which can lead to different distributions of attention, compared to position-based exposure. We formalize outlierness in a ranking, show that outliers are present in realistic datasets, and present the results of an eye-tracking study, showing that users scanning order and the exposure of items are influenced by the presence of outliers. We then introduce OMIT, a method for fair ranking in the presence of outliers. Given an outlier detection method, OMIT improves fair allocation of exposure by suppressing outliers in the top-k ranking. Using an academic search dataset, we show that outlierness optimization leads to a fairer policy that displays fewer outliers in the top-k, while maintaining a reasonable trade-off between fairness and utility.

    Supplementary Material

    MP4 File (wsdm-fp354.mp4)
    In this video we present our work on ''Understanding and mitigating the effect of outliers in fair ranking''. We start with describing an eye-tracking study which indicates that the presence of outlier items can impact user examination behavior. Then we explain how this phenomenon affects fairness of exposure in ranking. We continue with introducing our proposed method, OMIT, that optimizes for utility and fairness while accounting for outliers in ranking. At the end we present some of our results on two public datasets from TREC Fair Ranking track.

    References

    [1]
    Himan Abdollahpouri, Robin Burke, and Bamshad Mobasher. 2017. Controlling Popularity Bias in Learning-to-rank Recommendation. In RecSys . 42--46.
    [2]
    Aman Agarwal, Xuanhui Wang, Cheng Li, Michael Bendersky, and Marc Najork. 2019. Addressing Trust Bias for Unbiased Learning-to-rank. In WWW . 4--14.
    [3]
    Fabrizio Angiulli and Clara Pizzuti. 2002. Fast Outlier Detection in High Dimensional Spaces. In ECML PKDD. 15--27.
    [4]
    Abolfazl Asudeh, HV Jagadish, Julia Stoyanovich, and Gautam Das. 2019. Designing Fair Ranking Schemes. In SIGMOD. 1259--1276.
    [5]
    Ricardo Baeza-Yates. 2018. Bias on the Web. Commun. ACM, Vol. 61, 6 (2018), 54--61.
    [6]
    Asia J Biega, Krishna P Gummadi, and Gerhard Weikum. 2018. Equity of Attention: Amortizing Individual Fairness in Rankings. In SIGIR . 405--414.
    [7]
    Garrett Birkhoff. 1940. Lattice Theory .AMS.
    [8]
    Alexey Borisov, Ilya Markov, Maarten de Rijke, and Pavel Serdyukov. 2016. A Neural Click Model for Web Search. In WWW. 531--541.
    [9]
    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.
    [10]
    L Elisa Celis, Anay Mehrotra, and Nisheeth K Vishnoi. 2020. Interventions for Ranking in the Presence of Implicit Bias. In FAT* . 369--380.
    [11]
    L Elisa Celis, Damian Straszak, and Nisheeth K Vishnoi. 2018. Ranking with Fairness Constraints. In ICALP. 28:1--28:15.
    [12]
    Ruey-Cheng Chen, Qingyao Ai, Gaya Jayasinghe, and W Bruce Croft. 2019. Correcting for Recency Bias in Job Recommendation. In CIKM. 2185--2188.
    [13]
    Aleksandr Chuklin, Ilya Markov, and Maarten de Rijke. 2015. Click Models for Web Search .Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
    [14]
    Fernando Diaz, Bhaskar Mitra, Michael D Ekstrand, Asia J Biega, and Ben Carterette. 2020. Evaluating Stochastic Rankings with Expected Exposure. In CIKM. 275--284.
    [15]
    Susann Fiedler, Michael Schulte-Mecklenbeck, Frank Renkewitz, and Jacob L Orquin. 2020. Guideline for Reporting Standards of Eye-tracking Research in Decision Sciences. PsyArXiv preprint (2020).
    [16]
    Sahin Cem Geyik, Stuart Ambler, and Krishnaram Kenthapadi. 2019. Fairness-aware Ranking in Search & Recommendation Systems with Application to Linkedin Talent Search. In SIGKDD. 2221--2231.
    [17]
    Boris Iglewicz and David Caster Hoaglin. 1993. How to Detect and Handle Outliers .ASQ Quality Press.
    [18]
    Wen Jin, Anthony K. H. Tung, Jiawei Han, and Wei Wang. 2006. Ranking Outliers Using Symmetric Neighborhood Relationship. In PAKDD . 577--593.
    [19]
    Thorsten Joachims, Laura Granka, Bing Pan, Helene Hembrooke, and Geri Gay. 2005. Accurately Interpreting Clickthrough Data as Implicit Feedback. In SIGIR . 154--161.
    [20]
    Thorsten Joachims, Adith Swaminathan, and Tobias Schnabel. 2017. Unbiased Learning-to-rank with Biased Feedback. In WSDM. 781--789.
    [21]
    Zheng Li, Yue Zhao, N Botta, C Ionescu, and X COPOD Hu. 2020. COPOD: Copula-based Outlier Detection. In ICDM. 17--20.
    [22]
    Christopher D. Manning, Prabhakar Raghavan, and Hinrich Schütze. 2008. Introduction to Information Retrieval .Cambridge University Press.
    [23]
    Marvin Marcus and Rimhak Ree. 1959. Diagonals of Doubly Stochastic Matrices. The Quarterly Journal of Mathematics, Vol. 10, 1 (1959), 296--302.
    [24]
    Rishabh Mehrotra, James McInerney, Hugues Bouchard, Mounia Lalmas, and Fernando Diaz. 2018. Towards a Fair Marketplace: Counterfactual Evaluation of the Trade-off between Relevance, Fairness & Satisfaction in Recommendation Systems. In CIKM . 2243--2251.
    [25]
    Pavel Metrikov, Fernando Diaz, Sebastien Lahaie, and Justin Rao. 2014. Whole Page Optimization: How Page Elements Interact with the Position Auction. In EC . 583--600.
    [26]
    Marco Morik, Ashudeep Singh, Jessica Hong, and Thorsten Joachims. 2020. Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-rank. In SIGIR . 429--438.
    [27]
    Maeve O'Brien and Mark T Keane. 2006. Modeling Result-list Searching in the World Wide Web: The Role of Relevance Topologies and Trust Bias. In CogSci. 1881--1886.
    [28]
    Harrie Oosterhuis and Maarten de Rijke. 2021. Unifying Online and Counterfactual Learning to Rank: A Novel Counterfactual Estimator that Effectively Utilizes Online Interventions. In WSDM . 463--471.
    [29]
    Zohreh Ovaisi, Ragib Ahsan, Yifan Zhang, Kathryn Vasilaky, and Elena Zheleva. 2020. Correcting for Selection Bias in Learning-to-rank Systems. In WWW. 1863--1873.
    [30]
    Przemysław Pobrotyn, Tomasz Bartczak, Mikołaj Synowiec, Radosław Białobrzeski, and Jarosław Bojar. 2020. Context-aware Learning to Rank with Self-attention. SIGIR eCom (2020).
    [31]
    Piotr Sapiezynski, Wesley Zeng, Ronald E Robertson, Alan Mislove, and Christo Wilson. 2019. Quantifying the Impact of User Attentionon Fair Group Representation in Ranked Lists. In WWW . 553--562.
    [32]
    Ashudeep Singh and Thorsten Joachims. 2018. Fairness of Exposure in Rankings. In KDD. 2219--2228.
    [33]
    Ashudeep Singh and Thorsten Joachims. 2019. Policy Learning for Fairness in Ranking. In NeurIPS .
    [34]
    Julia Stoyanovich, Ke Yang, and HV Jagadish. 2018. Online Set Selection with Fairness and Diversity Constraints. In EDBT. 241--252.
    [35]
    Ali Vardasbi, Harrie Oosterhuis, and Maarten de Rijke. 2020. When Inverse Propensity Scoring does not Work: Affine Corrections for Unbiased Learning to Rank. In CIKM. 1475--1484.
    [36]
    Lequn Wang and Thorsten Joachims. 2021. User Fairness, Item Fairness, and Diversity for Rankings in Two-Sided Markets. In SIGIR . 23--41.
    [37]
    Xuanhui Wang, Michael Bendersky, Donald Metzler, and Marc Najork. 2016. Learning to Rank with Selection Bias in Personal Search. In SIGIR. 115--124.
    [38]
    Himank Yadav, Zhengxiao Du, and Thorsten Joachims. 2019. Policy-Gradient Training of Fair and Unbiased Ranking Functions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.08054 (2019).
    [39]
    Ke Yang and Julia Stoyanovich. 2017. Measuring Fairness in Ranked Outputs. In SSDBM. 1--6.
    [40]
    Yisong Yue, Rajan Patel, and Hein Roehrig. 2010. Beyond Position Bias: Examining Result Attractiveness as a Source of Presentation Bias in Clickthrough Data. In WWW. 1011--1018.
    [41]
    Meike Zehlike, Francesco Bonchi, Carlos Castillo, Sara Hajian, Mohamed Megahed, and Ricardo Baeza-Yates. 2017. FA*IR: A Fair Top-k Ranking Algorithm. In CIKM. 1569--1578.
    [42]
    Meike Zehlike, Ke Yang, and Julia Stoyanovich. 2021. Fairness in Ranking: A Survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.14000 (2021).

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Fairness-Aware Exposure Allocation via Adaptive RerankingProceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3626772.3657794(1504-1513)Online publication date: 10-Jul-2024
    • (2024)Brittleness index prediction using modified random forest based on particle swarm optimization of Upper Ordovician Wufeng to Lower Silurian Longmaxi shale gas reservoir in the Weiyuan Shale Gas Field, Sichuan Basin, ChinaGeoenergy Science and Engineering10.1016/j.geoen.2023.212518233(212518)Online publication date: Feb-2024
    • (2023)On the Impact of Outlier Bias on User ClicksProceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3539618.3591745(18-27)Online publication date: 19-Jul-2023
    • Show More Cited By

    Index Terms

    1. Understanding and Mitigating the Effect of Outliers in Fair Ranking

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      WSDM '22: Proceedings of the Fifteenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining
      February 2022
      1690 pages
      ISBN:9781450391320
      DOI:10.1145/3488560
      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: 15 February 2022

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. fair ranking
      2. learning to rank
      3. outliers

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Conference

      WSDM '22

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate 498 of 2,863 submissions, 17%

      Upcoming Conference

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)57
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)9

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)Fairness-Aware Exposure Allocation via Adaptive RerankingProceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3626772.3657794(1504-1513)Online publication date: 10-Jul-2024
      • (2024)Brittleness index prediction using modified random forest based on particle swarm optimization of Upper Ordovician Wufeng to Lower Silurian Longmaxi shale gas reservoir in the Weiyuan Shale Gas Field, Sichuan Basin, ChinaGeoenergy Science and Engineering10.1016/j.geoen.2023.212518233(212518)Online publication date: Feb-2024
      • (2023)On the Impact of Outlier Bias on User ClicksProceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3539618.3591745(18-27)Online publication date: 19-Jul-2023
      • (2023)Pairwise Fairness in Ranking as a Dissatisfaction MeasureProceedings of the Sixteenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining10.1145/3539597.3570459(931-939)Online publication date: 27-Feb-2023
      • (2022)Fairness of Exposure in Light of Incomplete Exposure EstimationProceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3477495.3531977(759-769)Online publication date: 6-Jul-2022
      • (2022)Experiments on Generalizability of User-Oriented Fairness in Recommender SystemsProceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3477495.3531718(2755-2764)Online publication date: 6-Jul-2022

      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