Why This, Not That? Mining User Profiles for Pair-wise Counterfactuals

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.21662v1
• Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2026 22:11:11 GMT
• Title: Why This, Not That? Mining User Profiles for Pair-wise Counterfactuals
• Abstract summary: We propose a new task, pairwise interpretation of item rankings, asking the comparative question Why is item A ranked higher than item B?''<n>An effective solution to this task, we argue, is inherently grounded in the operation of the recommendation algorithm.<n>We propose a class of techniques based on counterfactual learning to uncover the items in a user's profile that have contributed to the relative ranking of items.
• Score: 7.775878711756312
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The topic of explanation in recommender systems has seen steady research attention since the earliest days of the field. With some exceptions, this work has focused on the explanation of single items in a recommendation list and, especially recently, has emphasized approaches that are decoupled from the logic of the recommendation algorithm itself. Based on findings in the psychology of interpersonal communication, we propose a new task, pairwise interpretation of item rankings, asking the comparative question ``Why is item A ranked higher than item B?''. An effective solution to this task, we argue, is inherently grounded in the operation of the recommendation algorithm. We propose a class of techniques based on counterfactual learning to uncover the items in a user's profile that have contributed to the relative ranking of items. Using multiple datasets, we show that it is possible to identify such items as potential basis for comparative explanation.

Related papers

• MGFRec: Towards Reinforced Reasoning Recommendation with Multiple Groundings and Feedback [62.59727494001646]
  We propose performing multiple rounds of grounding during inference to help the LLM better understand the actual item space.<n> Comprehensive experiments conducted on three Amazon review datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of incorporating multiple groundings and feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-27T00:41:07Z)
• Improving Recommendation Relevance by simulating User Interest [77.34726150561087]
  We observe that recommendation "recency" can be straightforwardly and transparently maintained by iterative reduction of ranks of inactive items. The basic idea behind this work is patented in a context of online recommendation systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-03T03:35:28Z)
• Comparative Explanations of Recommendations [33.89230323979306]
  We develop an extract-and-refine architecture to explain the relative comparisons among a set of ranked items from a recommender system. We design a new explanation quality metric based on BLEU to guide the end-to-end training of the extraction and refinement components.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-01T02:55:56Z)
• Online Learning of Optimally Diverse Rankings [63.62764375279861]
  We propose an algorithm that efficiently learns the optimal list based on users' feedback only. We show that after $T$ queries, the regret of LDR scales as $O((N-L)log(T))$ where $N$ is the number of all items.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-13T12:13:20Z)
• Counterfactual Explainable Recommendation [22.590877963169103]
  We propose Counterfactual Explainable Recommendation (CountER), which takes the insights of counterfactual reasoning from causal inference for explainable recommendation. CountER seeks simple (low complexity) and effective (high strength) explanations for the model decision. Results show that our model generates more accurate and effective explanations than state-of-the-art explainable recommendation models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-24T06:37:57Z)
• On component interactions in two-stage recommender systems [82.38014314502861]
  Two-stage recommenders are used by many online platforms, including YouTube, LinkedIn, and Pinterest. We show that interactions between the ranker and the nominators substantially affect the overall performance. In particular, using a Mixture-of-Experts approach, we train the nominators to specialize on different subsets of the item pool.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-28T20:53:23Z)
• Item Recommendation from Implicit Feedback [8.877053863402484]
  This article provides an overview of item recommendation, its unique characteristics and some common approaches. The main body deals with learning algorithms and presents sampling based algorithms for general recommenders. The application of item recommenders for retrieval tasks is discussed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-21T18:50:21Z)
• Dynamic-K Recommendation with Personalized Decision Boundary [41.70842736417849]
  We develop a dynamic-K recommendation task as a joint learning problem with both ranking and classification objectives. We extend two state-of-the-art ranking-based recommendation methods, i.e., BPRMF and HRM, to the corresponding dynamic-K versions. Our experimental results on two datasets show that the dynamic-K models are more effective than the original fixed-N recommendation methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-25T13:02:57Z)
• Fairness-Aware Explainable Recommendation over Knowledge Graphs [73.81994676695346]
  We analyze different groups of users according to their level of activity, and find that bias exists in recommendation performance between different groups. We show that inactive users may be more susceptible to receiving unsatisfactory recommendations, due to insufficient training data for the inactive users. We propose a fairness constrained approach via re-ranking to mitigate this problem in the context of explainable recommendation over knowledge graphs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-03T05:04:38Z)
• Distance-based Positive and Unlabeled Learning for Ranking [13.339237388350043]
  Learning to rank is a problem of general interest. We show that learning to rank via combining representations using an integer linear program is effective when the supervision is as light as "these few items are similar to your item of interest"
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-20T01:53:58Z)
• SetRank: A Setwise Bayesian Approach for Collaborative Ranking from Implicit Feedback [50.13745601531148]
  We propose a novel setwise Bayesian approach for collaborative ranking, namely SetRank, to accommodate the characteristics of implicit feedback in recommender system. Specifically, SetRank aims at maximizing the posterior probability of novel setwise preference comparisons. We also present the theoretical analysis of SetRank to show that the bound of excess risk can be proportional to $sqrtM/N$.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-23T06:40:48Z)

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.