Probabilistic Permutation Graph Search: Black-Box Optimization for Fairness in Ranking
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
There are several measures for fairness in ranking, based on different underlying assumptions and perspectives. PL optimization with the REINFORCE algorithm can be used for optimizing black-box objective functions over permutations. In particular, it can be used for optimizing fairness measures. However, though effective for queries with a moderate number of repeating sessions, PL optimization has room for improvement for queries with a small number of repeating sessions. In this paper, we present a novel way of representing permutation distributions, based on the notion of permutation graphs. Similar to PL, our distribution representation, called PPG, can be used for black-box optimization of fairness. Different from PL, where pointwise logits are used as the distribution parameters, in PPG pairwise inversion probabilities together with a reference permutation construct the distribution. As such, the reference permutation can be set to the best sampled permutation regarding the objective function, making PPG suitable for both deterministic and stochastic rankings. Our experiments show that PPG, while comparable to PL for larger session repetitions (i.e., stochastic ranking), improves over PL for optimizing fairness metrics for queries with one session (i.e., deterministic ranking). Additionally, when accurate utility estimations are available, e.g., in tabular models, the performance of PPG in fairness optimization is significantly boosted compared to lower quality utility estimations from a learning to rank model, leading to a large performance gap with PL. Finally, the pairwise probabilities make it possible to impose pairwise constraints such as "item d1 should always be ranked higher than item d2." Such constraints can be used to simultaneously optimize the fairness metric and control another objective such as ranking performance.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Apr 2022.
Builds on
28 of 59 references.
References · 28
- 2016Neural Combinatorial Optimization with Reinforcement Learningcited by 608
- 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 586
- 2018Fairness of Exposure in Rankingscited by 190
- 2016Unbiased Learning-to-Rank with Biased Feedbackcited by 157
- 2014A* Samplingcited by 151
- 2019Fairness-Aware Ranking in Search & Recommendation Systems with Application to LinkedIn Talent Searchcited by 138
- 2018Equity of Attention: Amortizing Individual Fairness in Rankingscited by 124
- 2013Introducing LETOR 4.0 Datasetscited by 121
- 2017FA*IR: A Fair Top-k Ranking Algorithmcited by 113
- 2016Measuring Fairness in Ranked Outputscited by 81
- 2017Ranking with Fairness Constraintscited by 78
- 2019Policy Learning for Fairness in Rankingcited by 74
16 more
- 2020Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-Rankcited by 68
- 2020Evaluating Stochastic Rankings with Expected Exposurecited by 53
- 2017Designing Fair Ranking Schemescited by 40
- 2021Computationally Efficient Optimization of Plackett-Luce Ranking Models for Relevance and Fairnesscited by 36
- 2021Fairness in Ranking: A Surveycited by 33
- 2016Multiple-Play Bandits in the Position-Based Modelcited by 28
- 2020Interventions for Ranking in the Presence of Implicit Biascited by 27
- 2019Quantifying the Impact of User Attention on Fair Group Representation in Ranked Listscited by 24
- 2016DCM Bandits: Learning to Rank with Multiple Clickscited by 17
- 2019Policy-Gradient Training of Fair and Unbiased Ranking Functionscited by 16
- 2021Estimation of Fair Ranking Metrics with Incomplete Judgmentscited by 14
- 2019Low-variance Black-box Gradient Estimates for the Plackett-Luce Distributioncited by 11
- 2020Comparing Fair Ranking Metricscited by 8
- 2021Robust Generalization and Safe Query-Specialization in Counterfactual Learning to Rankcited by 6
- 2021Understanding and Mitigating the Effect of Outliers in Fair Rankingcited by 6
- 2021Mixture-Based Correction for Position and Trust Bias in Counterfactual Learning to Rankcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 3; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2023Recent Advances in the Foundations and Applications of Unbiased Learning to Rankcited by 1
- 2023Towards Better Fairness-Utility Trade-off: A Comprehensive Measurement-Based Reinforcement Learning Frameworkcited by 1
- 2023ExCalibR: Expected Calibration of Recommendationscited by 0
- 2026Scoring Is Not Enough: Addressing Gaps in Utility-fairness Trade-offs for Rankingcited by 0
- 2026Scoring Is Not Enough: Addressing Gaps in Utility-fairness Trade-offs for Ranking24 Jun 2026
- 2023Towards Better Fairness-Utility Trade-off: A Comprehensive Measurement-Based Reinforcement Learning Framework21 Jul 2023
- 2023Recent Advances in the Foundations and Applications of Unbiased Learning to Rank4 May 2023
- 2023ExCalibR: Expected Calibration of Recommendations24 Apr 2023