Choosing the Right Weights: Balancing Value, Strategy, and Noise in Recommender Systems
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Many recommender systems optimize a linear weighting of different user behaviors, such as clicks, likes, and shares. We analyze the optimal choice of weights from the perspectives of both users and content producers who strategically respond to the weights. We consider three aspects of each potential behavior: value-faithfulness (how well a behavior indicates whether the user values the content), strategy-robustness (how hard it is for producers to manipulate the behavior), and noisiness (how much estimation error there is in predicting the behavior). Our theoretical results show that for users, up-weighting more value-faithful and less noisy behaviors leads to higher utility, while for producers, up-weighting more value-faithful and strategy-robust behaviors leads to higher welfare (and the impact of noise is non-monotonic). Finally, we apply our framework to design weights on Facebook, using a large-scale dataset of approximately 70 million URLs shared on Facebook. Strikingly, we find that our user-optimal weight vector (a) delivers higher user value than a vector not accounting for variance; (b) also enhances broader societal outcomes, reducing misinformation and raising the quality of the URL domains, outcomes that were not directly targeted in our theoretical framework.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 May 2023.
Builds on
15 of 44 references.
References · 15
- 2020Performative Predictioncited by 318
- 2015Strategic Classificationcited by 256
- 2018Why Is My Classifier Discriminatory?cited by 143
- 2018How Do Classifiers Induce Agents To Invest Effort Strategically?cited by 82
- 2020The Role of Randomness and Noise in Strategic Classificationcited by 40
- 2022Modeling Content Creator Incentives on Algorithm-Curated Platformscited by 35
- 2018A Game-Theoretic Approach to Recommendation Systems with Strategic Content Providerscited by 33
- 2022Supply-Side Equilibria in Recommender Systemscited by 33
- 2022The Challenge of Understanding What Users Want: Inconsistent Preferences and Engagement Optimizationcited by 28
- 2020From Optimizing Engagement to Measuring Valuecited by 21
- 2021Strategic Rankingcited by 21
- 2021A/B Testing for Recommender Systems in a Two-sided Marketplacecited by 11
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.
7 papers.
- 2024Clickbait vs. Quality: How Engagement-Based Optimization Shapes the Content Landscape in Online Platformscited by 13
- 2024Multi-Objective Recommendation via Multivariate Policy Learningcited by 10
- 2025Value Alignment of Social Media Ranking Algorithmscited by 4
- 2025CTRL-Rec: Controlling Recommender Systems With Natural Languagecited by 4
- 2024System-2 Recommenders: Disentangling Utility and Engagement in Recommendation Systems via Temporal Point-Processescited by 2
- 2025MultiScale Contextual Bandits for Long Term Objectivescited by 0
- 2026A Production-Ready RL Framework for Personalized Utility Tuning with Pareto Sweeping in Pinterest Recommender Systemscited by 0
- 2026A Production-Ready RL Framework for Personalized Utility Tuning with Pareto Sweeping in Pinterest Recommender Systems8 May 2026
- 2025CTRL-Rec: Controlling Recommender Systems With Natural Language14 Oct 2025
- 2025Value Alignment of Social Media Ranking Algorithms17 Sep 2025
- 2025MultiScale Contextual Bandits for Long Term Objectives22 Mar 2025
- 2024System-2 Recommenders: Disentangling Utility and Engagement in Recommendation Systems via Temporal Point-Processes29 May 2024
- 2024Multi-Objective Recommendation via Multivariate Policy Learning3 May 2024
- 2024Clickbait vs. Quality: How Engagement-Based Optimization Shapes the Content Landscape in Online Platforms18 Jan 2024