mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

Break Out of a Pigeonhole: A Unified Framework for Examining Miscalibration, Bias, and Stereotype in Recommender Systems

arXiv 2312.17443 ↗First posted 29 Dec 2023cs.IR cs.AI cs.LGcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Despite the benefits of personalizing items and information tailored to users' needs, it has been found that recommender systems tend to introduce biases that favor popular items or certain categories of items, and dominant user groups. In this study, we aim to characterize the systematic errors of a recommendation system and how they manifest in various accountability issues, such as stereotypes, biases, and miscalibration. We propose a unified framework that distinguishes the sources of prediction errors into a set of key measures that quantify the various types of system-induced effects, both at the individual and collective levels. Based on our measuring framework, we examine the most widely adopted algorithms in the context of movie recommendation. Our research reveals three important findings: (1) Differences between algorithms: recommendations generated by simpler algorithms tend to be more stereotypical but less biased than those generated by more complex algorithms. (2) Disparate impact on groups and individuals: system-induced biases and stereotypes have a disproportionate effect on atypical users and minority groups (e.g., women and older users). (3) Mitigation opportunity: using structural equation modeling, we identify the interactions between user characteristics (typicality and diversity), system-induced effects, and miscalibration. We further investigate the possibility of mitigating system-induced effects by oversampling underrepresented groups and individuals, which was found to be effective in reducing stereotypes and improving recommendation quality. Our research is the first systematic examination of not only system-induced effects and miscalibration but also the stereotyping issue in recommender systems.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Dec 2023.

Builds on

22 of 56 references.

References · 22

  1. 2018UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reductioncited by 2,870
  2. 2017Neural Collaborative Filteringcited by 1,110
  3. 2017How Algorithmic Confounding in Recommendation Systems Increases Homogeneity and Decreases Utilitycited by 116
  4. 2019FairVis: Visual Analytics for Discovering Intersectional Bias in Machine Learningcited by 93
  5. 2019FairSight: Visual Analytics for Fairness in Decision Makingcited by 59
  6. 2021Deconfounded Recommendation for Alleviating Bias Amplificationcited by 51
  7. 2020Understanding Echo Chambers in E-commerce Recommender Systemscited by 40
  8. 2020The Connection Between Popularity Bias, Calibration, and Fairness in Recommendationcited by 35
  9. 2021Socially-Aware Self-Supervised Tri-Training for Recommendationcited by 32
  10. 2018Exploring Author Gender in Book Rating and Recommendationcited by 29
  11. 2019Fairness in representation: quantifying stereotyping as a representational harmcited by 26
  12. 2022User-controllable Recommendation Against Filter Bubblescited by 22
10 more
  1. 2018Bias Disparity in Recommendation Systemscited by 12
  2. 2019Crank up the volume: preference bias amplification in collaborative recommendationcited by 12
  3. 2022Towards Involving End-users in Interactive Human-in-the-loop AI Fairnesscited by 12
  4. 2021The Stereotyping Problem in Collaboratively Filtered Recommender Systemscited by 10
  5. 2019The Impact of Popularity Bias on Fairness and Calibration in Recommendationcited by 9
  6. 2020Gender Stereotype Reinforcement: Measuring the Gender Bias Conveyed by Ranking Algorithmscited by 9
  7. 2022Towards Responsible AI: A Design Space Exploration of Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence User Interfaces to Investigate Fairnesscited by 9
  8. 2022The Minority Matters: A Diversity-Promoting Collaborative Metric Learning Algorithmcited by 9
  9. 2019Bias Disparity in Collaborative Recommendation: Algorithmic Evaluation and Comparisoncited by 6
  10. 2020Investigating Potential Factors Associated with Gender Discrimination in Collaborative Recommender Systemscited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 1.

2 papers.