Doubly Calibrated Estimator for Recommendation on Data Missing Not At Random

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.00817v1
• Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 05:08:52 GMT
• Title: Doubly Calibrated Estimator for Recommendation on Data Missing Not At Random
• Authors: Wonbin Kweon, Hwanjo Yu
• Abstract summary: We argue that existing estimators rely on miscalibrated imputed errors and propensity scores. We propose a Doubly Calibrated Estimator that involves the calibration of both the imputation and propensity models.
• Score: 20.889464448762176
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recommender systems often suffer from selection bias as users tend to rate their preferred items. The datasets collected under such conditions exhibit entries missing not at random and thus are not randomized-controlled trials representing the target population. To address this challenge, a doubly robust estimator and its enhanced variants have been proposed as they ensure unbiasedness when accurate imputed errors or predicted propensities are provided. However, we argue that existing estimators rely on miscalibrated imputed errors and propensity scores as they depend on rudimentary models for estimation. We provide theoretical insights into how miscalibrated imputation and propensity models may limit the effectiveness of doubly robust estimators and validate our theorems using real-world datasets. On this basis, we propose a Doubly Calibrated Estimator that involves the calibration of both the imputation and propensity models. To achieve this, we introduce calibration experts that consider different logit distributions across users. Moreover, we devise a tri-level joint learning framework, allowing the simultaneous optimization of calibration experts alongside prediction and imputation models. Through extensive experiments on real-world datasets, we demonstrate the superiority of the Doubly Calibrated Estimator in the context of debiased recommendation tasks.

Related papers

• Provably Reliable Conformal Prediction Sets in the Presence of Data Poisoning [53.42244686183879]
  Conformal prediction provides model-agnostic and distribution-free uncertainty quantification. Yet, conformal prediction is not reliable under poisoning attacks where adversaries manipulate both training and calibration data. We propose reliable prediction sets (RPS): the first efficient method for constructing conformal prediction sets with provable reliability guarantees under poisoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-13T15:37:11Z)
• Optimizing Estimators of Squared Calibration Errors in Classification [2.3020018305241337]
  We propose a mean-squared error-based risk that enables the comparison and optimization of estimators of squared calibration errors. Our approach advocates for a training-validation-testing pipeline when estimating a calibration error.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T15:58:06Z)
• Fine-Grained Dynamic Framework for Bias-Variance Joint Optimization on Data Missing Not at Random [2.8165314121189247]
  In most practical applications such as recommendation systems, display advertising, and so forth, the collected data often contains missing values. We develop a systematic fine-grained dynamic learning framework to jointly optimize bias and variance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-24T10:07:09Z)
• Uncertainty-Calibrated Test-Time Model Adaptation without Forgetting [55.17761802332469]
  Test-time adaptation (TTA) seeks to tackle potential distribution shifts between training and test data by adapting a given model w.r.t. any test sample. Prior methods perform backpropagation for each test sample, resulting in unbearable optimization costs to many applications. We propose an Efficient Anti-Forgetting Test-Time Adaptation (EATA) method which develops an active sample selection criterion to identify reliable and non-redundant samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-18T05:49:45Z)
• Balancing Unobserved Confounding with a Few Unbiased Ratings in Debiased Recommendations [4.960902915238239]
  We propose a theoretically guaranteed model-agnostic balancing approach that can be applied to any existing debiasing method. The proposed approach makes full use of unbiased data by alternatively correcting model parameters learned with biased data, and adaptively learning balance coefficients of biased samples for further debiasing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-17T08:56:55Z)
• Improving Adaptive Conformal Prediction Using Self-Supervised Learning [72.2614468437919]
  We train an auxiliary model with a self-supervised pretext task on top of an existing predictive model and use the self-supervised error as an additional feature to estimate nonconformity scores. We empirically demonstrate the benefit of the additional information using both synthetic and real data on the efficiency (width), deficit, and excess of conformal prediction intervals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-23T18:57:14Z)
• Rethinking Missing Data: Aleatoric Uncertainty-Aware Recommendation [59.500347564280204]
  We propose a new Aleatoric Uncertainty-aware Recommendation (AUR) framework. AUR consists of a new uncertainty estimator along with a normal recommender model. As the chance of mislabeling reflects the potential of a pair, AUR makes recommendations according to the uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-22T04:32:51Z)
• Calibrated Selective Classification [34.08454890436067]
  We develop a new approach to selective classification in which we propose a method for rejecting examples with "uncertain" uncertainties. We present a framework for learning selectively calibrated models, where a separate selector network is trained to improve the selective calibration error of a given base model. We demonstrate the empirical effectiveness of our approach on multiple image classification and lung cancer risk assessment tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-25T13:31:09Z)
• Better Uncertainty Calibration via Proper Scores for Classification and Beyond [15.981380319863527]
  We introduce the framework of proper calibration errors, which relates every calibration error to a proper score. This relationship can be used to reliably quantify the model calibration improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-15T12:46:08Z)
• Unlabelled Data Improves Bayesian Uncertainty Calibration under Covariate Shift [100.52588638477862]
  We develop an approximate Bayesian inference scheme based on posterior regularisation. We demonstrate the utility of our method in the context of transferring prognostic models of prostate cancer across globally diverse populations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-26T13:50:19Z)
• Individual Calibration with Randomized Forecasting [116.2086707626651]
  We show that calibration for individual samples is possible in the regression setup if the predictions are randomized. We design a training objective to enforce individual calibration and use it to train randomized regression functions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-18T05:53:10Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.