How Fair is Your Diffusion Recommender Model?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.04339v1
• Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2024 15:17:40 GMT
• Title: How Fair is Your Diffusion Recommender Model?
• Authors: Daniele Malitesta, Giacomo Medda, Erasmo Purificato, Ludovico Boratto, Fragkiskos D. Malliaros, Mirko Marras, Ernesto William De Luca,
• Abstract summary: Diffusion-based recommender systems have recently proven to outperform traditional generative recommendation approaches. Machine learning literature has raised several concerns regarding the possibility that diffusion models may inadvertently carry information bias and lead to unfair outcomes. We conduct one of the first fairness investigations in the literature on DiffRec, a pioneer approach in diffusion-based recommendation.
• Score: 17.78188684065516
• License:
• Abstract: Diffusion-based recommender systems have recently proven to outperform traditional generative recommendation approaches, such as variational autoencoders and generative adversarial networks. Nevertheless, the machine learning literature has raised several concerns regarding the possibility that diffusion models, while learning the distribution of data samples, may inadvertently carry information bias and lead to unfair outcomes. In light of this aspect, and considering the relevance that fairness has held in recommendations over the last few decades, we conduct one of the first fairness investigations in the literature on DiffRec, a pioneer approach in diffusion-based recommendation. First, we propose an experimental setting involving DiffRec (and its variant L-DiffRec) along with nine state-of-the-art recommendation models, two popular recommendation datasets from the fairness-aware literature, and six metrics accounting for accuracy and consumer/provider fairness. Then, we perform a twofold analysis, one assessing models' performance under accuracy and recommendation fairness separately, and the other identifying if and to what extent such metrics can strike a performance trade-off. Experimental results from both studies confirm the initial unfairness warnings but pave the way for how to address them in future research directions.

Related papers

• Real-World Benchmarks Make Membership Inference Attacks Fail on Diffusion Models [12.386823277082746]
  Membership inference attacks (MIAs) on diffusion models have emerged as potential evidence of unauthorized data usage. Our study delves into the evaluation of state-of-the-art MIAs on diffusion models and reveals critical flaws and overly optimistic performance estimates. We introduce CopyMark, a more realistic MIA benchmark that distinguishes itself through the support for pre-trained diffusion models, unbiased datasets, and fair evaluation pipelines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T17:46:06Z)
• A Survey on Diffusion Models for Recommender Systems [36.543994040915926]
  We present the first comprehensive survey on diffusion models for recommendation. DMs have emerged as promising solutions for recommender systems due to their robust generative capabilities. Our taxonomy highlights the unique strengths of diffusion models in capturing complex data distributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-08T08:57:12Z)
• Mitigating Exposure Bias in Online Learning to Rank Recommendation: A Novel Reward Model for Cascading Bandits [23.15042648884445]
  We study exposure bias in a class of well-known contextual bandit algorithms known as Linear Cascading Bandits. We propose an Exposure-Aware reward model that updates the model parameters based on two factors: 1) implicit user feedback and 2) the position of the item in the recommendation list.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T09:35:01Z)
• Thinking Racial Bias in Fair Forgery Detection: Models, Datasets and Evaluations [63.52709761339949]
  We first contribute a dedicated dataset called the Fair Forgery Detection (FairFD) dataset, where we prove the racial bias of public state-of-the-art (SOTA) methods. We design novel metrics including Approach Averaged Metric and Utility Regularized Metric, which can avoid deceptive results. We also present an effective and robust post-processing technique, Bias Pruning with Fair Activations (BPFA), which improves fairness without requiring retraining or weight updates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-19T14:53:18Z)
• Fair Sampling in Diffusion Models through Switching Mechanism [5.560136885815622]
  We propose a fairness-aware sampling method called textitattribute switching mechanism for diffusion models. We mathematically prove and experimentally demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method on two key aspects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-06T06:55:26Z)
• Diff-Instruct: A Universal Approach for Transferring Knowledge From Pre-trained Diffusion Models [77.83923746319498]
  We propose a framework called Diff-Instruct to instruct the training of arbitrary generative models. We show that Diff-Instruct results in state-of-the-art single-step diffusion-based models. Experiments on refining GAN models show that the Diff-Instruct can consistently improve the pre-trained generators of GAN models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-29T04:22:57Z)
• 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)
• Fair-CDA: Continuous and Directional Augmentation for Group Fairness [48.84385689186208]
  We propose a fine-grained data augmentation strategy for imposing fairness constraints. We show that group fairness can be achieved by regularizing the models on transition paths of sensitive features between groups. Our proposed method does not assume any data generative model and ensures good generalization for both accuracy and fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-01T11:23:00Z)
• Improving Recommendation Fairness via Data Augmentation [66.4071365614835]
  Collaborative filtering based recommendation learns users' preferences from all users' historical behavior data, and has been popular to facilitate decision making. A recommender system is considered unfair when it does not perform equally well for different user groups according to users' sensitive attributes. In this paper, we study how to improve recommendation fairness from the data augmentation perspective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-13T13:11:46Z)
• FairIF: Boosting Fairness in Deep Learning via Influence Functions with Validation Set Sensitive Attributes [51.02407217197623]
  We propose a two-stage training algorithm named FAIRIF. It minimizes the loss over the reweighted data set where the sample weights are computed. We show that FAIRIF yields models with better fairness-utility trade-offs against various types of bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-15T05:14:48Z)
• Mind the Trade-off: Debiasing NLU Models without Degrading the In-distribution Performance [70.31427277842239]
  We introduce a novel debiasing method called confidence regularization. It discourages models from exploiting biases while enabling them to receive enough incentive to learn from all the training examples. We evaluate our method on three NLU tasks and show that, in contrast to its predecessors, it improves the performance on out-of-distribution datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-01T11:22:55Z)

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.