Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Fairness in Recommendation: Foundations, Methods and Applications

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2205.13619 v6 pith:ZITQROI5 submitted 2022-05-26 cs.IR cs.AIcs.LG

classification cs.IRcs.AIcs.LG
keywords fairnessrecommendationrecommendersurveysystemsresearchapplicationschallenges
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

As one of the most pervasive applications of machine learning, recommender systems are playing an important role on assisting human decision making. The satisfaction of users and the interests of platforms are closely related to the quality of the generated recommendation results. However, as a highly data-driven system, recommender system could be affected by data or algorithmic bias and thus generate unfair results, which could weaken the reliance of the systems. As a result, it is crucial to address the potential unfairness problems in recommendation settings. Recently, there has been growing attention on fairness considerations in recommender systems with more and more literature on approaches to promote fairness in recommendation. However, the studies are rather fragmented and lack a systematic organization, thus making it difficult to penetrate for new researchers to the domain. This motivates us to provide a systematic survey of existing works on fairness in recommendation. This survey focuses on the foundations for fairness in recommendation literature. It first presents a brief introduction about fairness in basic machine learning tasks such as classification and ranking in order to provide a general overview of fairness research, as well as introduce the more complex situations and challenges that need to be considered when studying fairness in recommender systems. After that, the survey will introduce fairness in recommendation with a focus on the taxonomies of current fairness definitions, the typical techniques for improving fairness, as well as the datasets for fairness studies in recommendation. The survey also talks about the challenges and opportunities in fairness research with the hope of promoting the fair recommendation research area and beyond.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Fair-Count-Min: Frequency Estimation under Equal Group-wise Approximation Factor

    cs.DS 2025-05 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    Fair-Count-Min partitions Count-Min columns among groups, allocating columns by group size for one hash row and by a binomial-minimum equation for multiple rows, aiming to equalize expected approximation factors.

  2. Improving Recommendation Fairness via Graph Structure and Representation Augmentation

    cs.IR 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    FairDDA improves group fairness in GCN recommenders via dual data augmentation (edge pruning and feature masking) plus HSIC debiasing, with reported gains on two datasets.

  3. Understanding Accuracy-Fairness Trade-offs in Re-ranking through Elasticity in Economics

    cs.IR 2025-04 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Re-ranking accuracy-fairness trade-offs are modeled as commodity-tax transfer, with an EF-Curve metric family and ElasticRank algorithm built on utility elasticity.

Pith tools