Affiliation:
1. Humboldt University of Berlin, Max Planck Institute for Software Systems, and Zalando Research, Germany
2. New York University, NY, and University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA
3. New York University, NY, USA
Abstract
In the past few years, there has been much work on incorporating fairness requirements into algorithmic rankers, with contributions coming from the data management, algorithms, information retrieval, and recommender systems communities. In this survey, we give a systematic overview of this work, offering a broad perspective that connects formalizations and algorithmic approaches across subfields. An important contribution of our work is in developing a common narrative around the value frameworks that motivate specific fairness-enhancing interventions in ranking. This allows us to unify the presentation of mitigation objectives and of algorithmic techniques to help meet those objectives or identify trade-offs.
In the first part of this survey, we describe four classification frameworks for fairness-enhancing interventions, along which we relate the technical methods surveyed in this article, discuss evaluation datasets, and present technical work on fairness in score-based ranking. In the second part of this survey, we present methods that incorporate fairness in supervised learning, and also give representative examples of recent work on fairness in recommendation and matchmaking systems. We also discuss evaluation frameworks for fair score-based ranking and fair learning-to-rank, and draw a set of recommendations for the evaluation of fair ranking methods.
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
Subject
General Computer Science,Theoretical Computer Science
Reference63 articles.
1. AirBnB. (????). AirBnB. Retrieved from https://insideairbnb.com.
2. Julia Angwin Jeff Larson Surya Mattu and Lauren Kirchner. 2016. Machine bias. ProPublica. Retrieved from https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing.
3. Bias on the web
4. Fairness in Recommendation Ranking through Pairwise Comparisons
5. Asia J. Biega, Fernando Diaz, Michael D. Ekstrand, and Sebastian Kohlmeier. 2019. Overview of the TREC 2019 fair ranking track. In Proceedings of the 28th Text REtrieval Conference.
Cited by
30 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Properties of Group Fairness Measures for Rankings;ACM Transactions on Social Computing;2024-08-27
2. Can We Trust Recommender System Fairness Evaluation? The Role of Fairness and Relevance;Proceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval;2024-07-10
3. A Survey on Variational Autoencoders in Recommender Systems;ACM Computing Surveys;2024-06-24
4. Report on the Search Futures Workshop at ECIR 2024;ACM SIGIR Forum;2024-06
5. Query Refinement for Diverse Top-k Selection;Proceedings of the ACM on Management of Data;2024-05-29