mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

When Collaborative Filtering is not Collaborative: Unfairness of PCA for Recommendations

arXiv 2310.09687 ↗First posted 15 Oct 2023cs.LG cs.CYcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We study the fairness of dimensionality reduction methods for recommendations. We focus on the fundamental method of principal component analysis (PCA), which identifies latent components and produces a low-rank approximation via the leading components while discarding the trailing components. Prior works have defined notions of "fair PCA"; however, these definitions do not answer the following question: why is PCA unfair? We identify two underlying popularity mechanisms that induce item unfairness in PCA. The first negatively impacts less popular items because less popular items rely on trailing latent components to recover their values. The second negatively impacts highly popular items, since the leading PCA components specialize in individual popular items instead of capturing similarities between items. To address these issues, we develop a polynomial-time algorithm, Item-Weighted PCA, that flexibly up-weights less popular items when optimizing for leading principal components. We theoretically show that PCA, in all cases, and Normalized PCA, in cases of block-diagonal matrices, are instances of Item-Weighted PCA. We empirically show that there exist datasets for which Item-Weighted PCA yields the optimal solution while the baselines do not. In contrast to past dimensionality reduction re-weighting techniques, Item-Weighted PCA solves a convex optimization problem and enforces a hard rank constraint. Our evaluations on real-world datasets show that Item-Weighted PCA not only mitigates both unfairness mechanisms, but also produces recommendations that outperform those of PCA baselines.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Oct 2023.

Builds on

19 of 53 references.

References · 19

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
  2. 2020LightGCN: Simplifying and Powering Graph Convolution Network for Recommendationcited by 1,139
  3. 2016Recommendations as Treatments: Debiasing Learning and Evaluationcited by 248
  4. 2018Why Is My Classifier Discriminatory?cited by 143
  5. 2019Managing Popularity Bias in Recommender Systems with Personalized Re-rankingcited by 82
  6. 2017Ranking with Fairness Constraintscited by 78
  7. 2020FairRec: Two-Sided Fairness for Personalized Recommendations in Two-Sided Platformscited by 78
  8. 2018The Price of Fair PCA: One Extra Dimensioncited by 67
  9. 2020A Faster Interior Point Method for Semidefinite Programmingcited by 53
  10. 2023A Survey on Popularity Bias in Recommender Systemscited by 43
  11. 2021User-centered Evaluation of Popularity Bias in Recommender Systemscited by 38
  12. 2023Alleviating Matthew Effect of Offline Reinforcement Learning in Interactive Recommendationcited by 38
7 more
  1. 2021Two-sided fairness in rankings via Lorenz dominancecited by 28
  2. 2021Online certification of preference-based fairness for personalized recommender systemscited by 22
  3. 2018Convex Formulations for Fair Principal Component Analysiscited by 20
  4. 2019Efficient Fair Principal Component Analysiscited by 20
  5. 2021Fast and Efficient MMD-based Fair PCA via Optimization over Stiefel Manifoldcited by 18
  6. 2013Stochastic Optimization of PCA with Capped MSGcited by 6
  7. 2022A novel approach for Fair Principal Component Analysis based on eigendecompositioncited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.

1 paper.