mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

CFaiRLLM: Consumer Fairness Evaluation in Large-Language Model Recommender System

arXiv 2403.05668 ↗First posted 8 Mar 2024cs.IRcited by 18

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

This work takes a critical stance on previous studies concerning fairness evaluation in Large Language Model (LLM)-based recommender systems, which have primarily assessed consumer fairness by comparing recommendation lists generated with and without sensitive user attributes. Such approaches implicitly treat discrepancies in recommended items as biases, overlooking whether these changes might stem from genuine personalization aligned with the true preferences of users. Moreover, these earlier studies typically address single sensitive attributes in isolation, neglecting the complex interplay of intersectional identities. In response to these shortcomings, we introduce CFaiRLLM, an enhanced evaluation framework that not only incorporates true preference alignment but also rigorously examines intersectional fairness by considering overlapping sensitive attributes. Additionally, CFaiRLLM introduces diverse user profile sampling strategies-random, top-rated, and recency-focused-to better understand the impact of profile generation fed to LLMs in light of inherent token limitations in these systems. Given that fairness depends on accurately understanding users' tastes and preferences, these strategies provide a more realistic assessment of fairness within RecLLMs. To validate the efficacy of CFaiRLLM, we conducted extensive experiments using MovieLens and LastFM datasets, applying various sampling strategies and sensitive attribute configurations. The evaluation metrics include both item similarity measures and true preference alignment considering both hit and ranking (Jaccard Similarity and PRAG), thereby conducting a multifaceted analysis of recommendation fairness.

Key facts. Cited by 18 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 8 Mar 2024.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 4; 2025: 10; 2026: 4.

18 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2024Bias and Unfairness in Information Retrieval Systems: New Challenges in the LLM Eracited by 97
  2. 2024A Review of Modern Recommender Systems Using Generative Models (Gen-RecSys)cited by 58
  3. 2025Poison-RAG: Adversarial Data Poisoning Attacks on Retrieval-Augmented Generation in Recommender Systemscited by 32
  4. 2025A Survey of Foundation Model-Powered Recommender Systems: From Feature-Based, Generative to Agentic Paradigmscited by 17
  5. 2024"Global is Good, Local is Bad?": Understanding Brand Bias in LLMscited by 13
  6. 2025Toward Holistic Evaluation of Recommender Systems Powered by Generative Modelscited by 11
  7. 2025Exposing Product Bias in LLM Investment Recommendationcited by 6
  8. 2024A Normative Framework for Benchmarking Consumer Fairness in Large Language Model Recommender Systemcited by 4
  9. 2025Stairway to Fairness: Connecting Group and Individual Fairnesscited by 3
  10. 2025PerFairX: Is There a Balance Between Fairness and Personality in Large Language Model Recommendations?cited by 3
  11. 2025Biases in Edge Language Models: Detection, Analysis, and Mitigationcited by 1
  12. 2025Augment or Not? A Comparative Study of Pure and Augmented Large Language Model Recommenderscited by 1
6 more
  1. 2025From Personalization to Prejudice: Bias and Discrimination in Memory-Enhanced AI Agents for Recruitmentcited by 1
  2. 2026Uncertainty and Fairness Awareness in LLM-Based Recommendation Systemscited by 1
  3. 2026Lightweight Fairness for LLM-Based Recommendations via Kernelized Projection and Gated Adapterscited by 1
  4. 2026Polarization by Default: Auditing Recommendation Bias in LLM-Based Content Curationcited by 1
  5. 2025HALF: Harm-Aware LLM Fairness Evaluation Aligned with Deploymentcited by 0
  6. 2026MedicalRec: Medical recommender system for image classification without retrainingcited by 0