mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

A Unified Causal Framework for Auditing Recommender Systems for Ethical Concerns

arXiv 2409.13210 ↗First posted 20 Sep 2024cs.LG cs.IRcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As recommender systems become widely deployed in different domains, they increasingly influence their users' beliefs and preferences. Auditing recommender systems is crucial as it not only ensures the continuous improvement of recommendation algorithms but also safeguards against potential issues like biases and ethical concerns. In this paper, we view recommender system auditing from a causal lens and provide a general recipe for defining auditing metrics. Under this general causal auditing framework, we categorize existing auditing metrics and identify gaps in them -- notably, the lack of metrics for auditing user agency while accounting for the multi-step dynamics of the recommendation process. We leverage our framework and propose two classes of such metrics:future- and past-reacheability and stability, that measure the ability of a user to influence their own and other users' recommendations, respectively. We provide both a gradient-based and a black-box approach for computing these metrics, allowing the auditor to compute them under different levels of access to the recommender system. In our experiments, we demonstrate the efficacy of methods for computing the proposed metrics and inspect the design of recommender systems through these proposed metrics.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Sep 2024.

Builds on

18 of 37 references.

References · 18

  1. 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 804
  2. 2023Fine-Tuning Language Models with Just Forward Passescited by 345
  3. 2016Recommendations as Treatments: Debiasing Learning and Evaluationcited by 248
  4. 2020Bias and Debias in Recommender System: A Survey and Future Directionscited by 240
  5. 2020Counterfactual Explanations and Algorithmic Recourses for Machine Learning: A Reviewcited by 174
  6. 2017How Algorithmic Confounding in Recommendation Systems Increases Homogeneity and Decreases Utilitycited by 120
  7. 2019Managing Popularity Bias in Recommender Systems with Personalized Re-rankingcited by 82
  8. 2019Counterfactual Risk Assessments, Evaluation, and Fairnesscited by 59
  9. 2021The Use and Misuse of Counterfactuals in Ethical Machine Learningcited by 52
  10. 2022Causal Conceptions of Fairness and their Consequencescited by 38
  11. 2018Fighting Fire with Fire: Using Antidote Data to Improve Polarization and Fairness of Recommender Systemscited by 37
  12. 2015Estimating the Causal Impact of Recommendation Systems from Observational Datacited by 21
6 more
  1. 2019Recommendations and User Agency: The Reachability of Collaboratively-Filtered Informationcited by 21
  2. 2022Fair ranking: a critical review, challenges, and future directionscited by 21
  3. 2021Measuring Recommender System Effects with Simulated Userscited by 20
  4. 2020Unbiased Learning for the Causal Effect of Recommendationcited by 18
  5. 2022Long-term Dynamics of Fairness Intervention in Connection Recommender Systemscited by 10
  6. 2021Quantifying Availability and Discovery in Recommender Systems via Stochastic Reachabilitycited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.