Measuring Individual User Fairness with User Similarity and Effectiveness Disparity
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Individual user fairness is commonly understood as treating similar users similarly. In Recommender Systems (RSs), several evaluation measures exist for quantifying individual user fairness. These measures evaluate fairness via either: (i) the disparity in RS effectiveness scores regardless of user similarity, or (ii) the disparity in items recommended to similar users regardless of item relevance. Both disparity in recommendation effectiveness and user similarity are very important in fairness, yet no existing individual user fairness measure simultaneously accounts for both. In brief, current user fairness evaluation measures implement a largely incomplete definition of fairness. To fill this gap, we present Pairwise User unFairness (PUF), a novel evaluation measure of individual user fairness that considers both effectiveness disparity and user similarity. PUF is the only measure that can express this important distinction. We empirically validate that PUF does this consistently across 4 datasets and 7 rankers, and robustly when varying user similarity or effectiveness. In contrast, all other measures are either almost insensitive to effectiveness disparity or completely insensitive to user similarity. We contribute the first RS evaluation measure to reliably capture both user similarity and effectiveness in individual user fairness. Our code: https://github.com/theresiavr/PUF-individual-user-fairness-recsys.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Jan 2026.
Builds on
23 of 53 references.
References · 23
- 2017Neural Collaborative Filteringcited by 1,108
- 2019Neural Graph Collaborative Filteringcited by 660
- 2020RecBole: Towards a Unified, Comprehensive and Efficient Framework for Recommendation Algorithmscited by 137
- 2022A Survey on the Fairness of Recommender Systemscited by 102
- 2022Improving Graph Collaborative Filtering with Neighborhood-enriched Contrastive Learningcited by 86
- 2020FairRec: Two-Sided Fairness for Personalized Recommendations in Two-Sided Platformscited by 77
- 2020Fairness-Aware Explainable Recommendation over Knowledge Graphscited by 74
- 2021Fairness in Rankings and Recommendations: An Overviewcited by 62
- 2020Exploring Data Splitting Strategies for the Evaluation of Recommendation Modelscited by 48
- 2018Fighting Fire with Fire: Using Antidote Data to Improve Polarization and Fairness of Recommender Systemscited by 37
- 2021TFROM: A Two-sided Fairness-Aware Recommendation Model for Both Customers and Providerscited by 31
- 2022Tenrec: A Large-scale Multipurpose Benchmark Dataset for Recommender Systemscited by 31
11 more
- 2022Fairness in Recommendation: Foundations, Methods and Applicationscited by 27
- 2021Online certification of preference-based fairness for personalized recommender systemscited by 22
- 2023Fairness and Diversity in Recommender Systems: A Surveycited by 22
- 2018User Fairness in Recommender Systemscited by 20
- 2022Inherent Limitations of AI Fairnesscited by 12
- 2021Towards Fair Recommendation in Two-Sided Platformscited by 8
- 2022Measuring Disparate Outcomes of Content Recommendation Algorithms with Distributional Inequality Metricscited by 8
- 2017Evaluation Measures for Relevance and Credibility in Ranked Listscited by 6
- 2023Evaluation Measures of Individual Item Fairness for Recommender Systems: A Critical Studycited by 5
- 2022Principled Multi-Aspect Evaluation Measures of Rankingscited by 3
- 2025Stairway to Fairness: Connecting Group and Individual Fairnesscited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.