Calibrating Explore-Exploit Trade-off for Fair Online Learning to Rank
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Online learning to rank (OL2R) has attracted great research interests in recent years, thanks to its advantages in avoiding expensive relevance labeling as required in offline supervised ranking model learning. Such a solution explores the unknowns (e.g., intentionally present selected results on top positions) to improve its relevance estimation. This however triggers concerns on its ranking fairness: different groups of items might receive differential treatments during the course of OL2R. But existing fair ranking solutions usually require the knowledge of result relevance or a performing ranker beforehand, which contradicts with the setting of OL2R and thus cannot be directly applied to guarantee fairness. In this work, we propose a general framework to achieve fairness defined by group exposure in OL2R. The key idea is to calibrate exploration and exploitation for fairness control, relevance learning and online ranking quality. In particular, when the model is exploring a set of results for relevance feedback, we confine the exploration within a subset of random permutations, where fairness across groups is maintained while the feedback is still unbiased. Theoretically we prove such a strategy introduces minimum distortion in OL2R's regret to obtain fairness. Extensive empirical analysis is performed on two public learning to rank benchmark datasets to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed solution compared to existing fair OL2R solutions.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Nov 2021.
Builds on
29 of 47 references.
References · 29
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
- 2018Fairness of Exposure in Rankingscited by 189
- 2016Unbiased Learning-to-Rank with Biased Feedbackcited by 155
- 2019Fairness-Aware Ranking in Search & Recommendation Systems with Application to LinkedIn Talent Searchcited by 137
- 2018Equity of Attention: Amortizing Individual Fairness in Rankingscited by 124
- 2013Introducing LETOR 4.0 Datasetscited by 120
- 2017FA*IR: A Fair Top-k Ranking Algorithmcited by 113
- 2016Measuring Fairness in Ranked Outputscited by 81
- 2017Ranking with Fairness Constraintscited by 78
- 2015Cascading Bandits: Learning to Rank in the Cascade Modelcited by 75
- 2019Policy Learning for Fairness in Rankingcited by 74
- 2020Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-Rankcited by 67
17 more
- 2021Fairness in Ranking: A Surveycited by 33
- 2018Estimating Position Bias without Intrusive Interventionscited by 31
- 2018TopRank: A practical algorithm for online stochastic rankingcited by 30
- 2021Fairness in Ranking under Uncertaintycited by 27
- 2017Online Learning to Rank in Stochastic Click Modelscited by 26
- 2018Differentiable Unbiased Online Learning to Rankcited by 24
- 2019FairSearch: A Tool For Fairness in Ranked Search Resultscited by 22
- 2021When Fair Ranking Meets Uncertain Inferencecited by 22
- 2018Online Learning to Rank with Featurescited by 18
- 2016DCM Bandits: Learning to Rank with Multiple Clickscited by 17
- 2019Policy-Gradient Training of Fair and Unbiased Ranking Functionscited by 16
- 2018Intervention Harvesting for Context-Dependent Examination-Bias Estimationcited by 14
- 2018Efficient Exploration of Gradient Space for Online Learning to Rankcited by 9
- 2019Variance Reduction in Gradient Exploration for Online Learning to Rankcited by 8
- 2021PairRank: Online Pairwise Learning to Rank by Divide-and-Conquercited by 6
- 2017Balancing Speed and Quality in Online Learning to Rank for Information Retrievalcited by 3
- 2018BubbleRank: Safe Online Learning to Re-Rank via Implicit Click Feedbackcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.
1 paper.