Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 52 references

Alleviating User-Sensitive bias with Fair Generative Sequential Recommendation Model

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a diffusion-based sequential recommender, FairGENRec, reduces sensitive-feature bias in recommendations while preserving or slightly improving accuracy across three real-world datasets.

desk verdict FairGENRec is a plausible new diffusion-plus-debiasing recipe, but its headline fairness numbers are scored by its own co-trained classifier, so the 'dual enhancement' claim is not yet established. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.19777 v2 pith:5VV26TMV submitted 2025-06-24 cs.IR cs.AI

Yang Liu , Feng Wu , Xuefang Zhu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.IRcs.AI
keywords recommendationfairnesssequentialdiffusionmodelsensitivefeaturebiasmulti-interestmodelinggenerativedebiasing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to establish that a denoising diffusion model, guided by a sensitive-feature recognizer, can reduce user-sensitive bias in sequential recommendation without paying the usual accuracy cost. It argues that users sharing a sensitive feature, such as gender, tolerance, or engagement level, leave correlated behavioral patterns that ordinary models amplify. FairGENRec injects noise only until a recognizer loses confidence about the user's sensitive class, then denoises with a Transformer that injects multi-interest representations stripped of sensitive-feature bias. On Beauty, ML-1M, and Yelp, the paper reports fairness improvements of roughly 49.91%, 46.42%, and 38.22% in Macro-F1 over strong diffusion baselines, alongside small accuracy gains. The paper also claims this is the first work to introduce diffusion models into recommendation fairness.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the diffusion forward/reverse loop gated by the Sensitive Feature Recognize Model, a Transformer classifier with a class token that predicts the user's sensitive feature from the interaction sequence. SFRM chooses the number of noise steps per user: noise is added until SFRM's confidence in the sensitive class drops to 0.5, preserving user-specific signal while erasing group-correlated signal. The reverse pass is carried by a sequential denoise model built on a Transformer encoder, and fairness is imposed by a multi-interests extraction layer using dynamic routing capsules plus label-aware attention, whose vectors are regularized against the sensitive-feature embedding through the loss $L_I$; a second training stage swaps in insensitive user features for personalization. Equivalently, the method converts unfairness into a controllable signal-to-noise ratio in representation space.

What would settle it

Recompute Macro-F1 on all models using an independent classifier trained only on raw user embeddings and item categories, or measure demographic parity directly on recommended item categories; if FairGENRec's fairness advantage over DiffuRec shrinks to near zero or reverses, the reported fairness gains are artifacts of using the co-trained SFRM as the evaluator.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

FairGENRec's central claim is that recommendation unfairness rooted in user-sensitive features can be mitigated inside the generative process itself. During training, a Sensitive Feature Recognize Model reads the interaction sequence and the forward diffusion process stops adding noise as soon as the recognizer's confidence in identifying the user's sensitive class falls to 0.5, so the corrupted representation still carries personalized signal. The reverse process uses a Transformer-based sequential denoise model whose outputs are combined with multi-interest capsule vectors; a fairness regularizer penalizes alignment between those interest vectors and the sensitive-feature user embedding, and a second training stage replaces sensitive embeddings with insensitive ones for personalization. The paper reports that FairGENRec improves Macro-F1 fairness by roughly 49.91%, 46.42%, and 38.22% while improving NDCG/HR by up to 0.94%/1.99%, 1.75%/0.79%, and 1.80%/1.54% on Beauty, ML-1M, and Yelp, respectively, with case studies showing recommended-item categories shifting away from gender- and engagement-correlated patterns.

Load-bearing premise

The fairness results rest on the assumption that the Sensitive Feature Recognize Model's classification confidence is a valid measure of sensitive-feature leakage, and that this same model judges baseline and FairGENRec outputs neutrally even though it is co-trained with FairGENRec.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Fairness gains do not come from sacrificing accuracy: on all three datasets FairGENRec leads or nearly leads every accuracy metric while cutting Macro-F1 by roughly 38 to 50 percent relative to the strongest diffusion baselines.
  • The SFRM-gated noise schedule is load-bearing: ablations removing SFRM worsen Macro-F1 on all three datasets, while removing the diffusion step embedding mainly hurts accuracy.
  • Generative diffusion baselines already beat Transformer and adversarial-VAE baselines on fairness, which the paper reads as evidence that uncertainty modeling itself counteracts group-correlated patterns.
  • Two-stage training separates debiasing in stage one from personalization in stage two, so the model can retain personalization without reintroducing sensitive-feature bias.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural testable extension would be to replace SFRM's confidence threshold with a direct statistical parity constraint on the generated items, decoupling guidance from evaluation and allowing application to demographic groups the recognizer was not trained on.
  • Because the fairness metric is computed with the same SFRM, the reported 38 to 50 percent gains may partly reflect the model learning to hide sensitive features from that particular classifier; an independent auditor classifier or category-level diversity metric would separate genuine debiasing from classifier-specific obfuscation.
  • SFRM-guided stopping effectively personalizes the amount of corruption per user, suggesting a broader principle: noise schedules guided by a bias signal could be exported to other generative tasks where group-correlated features should be suppressed without destroying instance identity.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes FairGENRec, a diffusion-model-based sequential recommender that injects noise under the guidance of a sensitive-feature recognition model (SFRM) and denoises with a Transformer plus multi-interest capsule module. It reports accuracy and fairness improvements over seven baselines on Beauty, ML-1M, and Yelp, with fairness measured by Macro-F1 of SFRM on model outputs. The paper also presents ablations and qualitative case studies to support the claimed dual enhancement of accuracy and fairness.

Significance. If the fairness gains were established with an independent evaluation, this would be a useful contribution: it is among the first to bring diffusion models to recommendation fairness, and the architecture—SFRM-guided forward diffusion, multi-interest routing, and two-stage training—is coherent and described in enough detail to reimplement. The paper provides comprehensive comparisons and ablations. However, the headline fairness result is currently tied to a co-trained classifier used both as a training signal and as the evaluation probe, and the accuracy gains are small and reported without variance. These issues must be resolved before the dual-enhancement claim can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5.1.2, Eq. (13), Algorithm 2] The fairness evaluation is circular with respect to SFRM. The same SFRM is co-trained with FairGENRec through the loss L = LM + λI LI + λF LF (Eq. 13) and is used to stop forward diffusion (Section 4.2.1). Applying this SFRM to baseline outputs and measuring Macro-F1, as stated in Section 5.1.2, does not provide a neutral probe: FairGENRec is explicitly optimized to make SFRM's sensitive-feature predictions less confident, so lower Macro-F1 values may reflect SFRM's adaptation to FairGENRec's representation geometry rather than a genuine reduction in sensitive-feature leakage. The paper reports no SFRM classification accuracy on any model's outputs, no calibration check, and no independent fairness metric. Please add an independent evaluation such as group-wise exposure or category-distribution parity, and report per-model SFRM accuracy, before claiming fairness improvements of 49.91%, 46.42%, and 38.22%.
  2. [Table 3 and Section 5.2] The accuracy improvements over DiffRec and DiffuRec are small—at most about 0.94%/1.99%, 1.75%/0.79%, and 1.80%/1.54% on the three datasets—but Table 3 reports only 5-seed averages without standard deviations, confidence intervals, or significance tests. These differences are within the range of typical seed-level variation in sequential recommendation benchmarks, so the claim of a 'small degree of improvement in accuracy' is not yet supported. Please report standard deviations and paired significance tests (or confidence intervals) for both Table 3 and Table 4.
  3. [Section 5.2] The reported fairness improvement percentages use inconsistent reference baselines. On Beauty and ML-1M, the 49.91% and 46.42% improvements are relative to DiffuRec, whereas the 38.22% improvement on Yelp is relative to DiffRec (0.6878 to 0.4249); against DiffuRec on Yelp, the reduction is only 5.83% (0.4512 to 0.4249). This inconsistency makes the cross-dataset fairness comparison misleading. Please define a single reference-baseline rule, such as always comparing against the strongest fairness baseline, and report the relative improvements consistently.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 4.2.1] The text says 'when SFDR is not well-trained' but should refer to the SFRM.
  2. [Algorithm 2] The line 'Ed is generated by Eq.(10)' is incorrect: Eq. (10) defines the target output o_t, not the forward noise-addition process. This should refer to the forward process equation in Section 3 or Section 4.2.1.
  3. [Table 1 and affiliations] There are typographical errors: 'preprecessed' should be 'preprocessed', 'Univeristy' should be 'University', and 'Xaiver' should be 'Xavier'.
  4. [Section 5.4] The case-study analysis in Figures 4-6 is descriptive and does not include statistical tests; the abstract's phrase 'statistical analysis of the cases' overstates the evidence presented.
  5. [Section 5.3.2] The ablation study in Table 4 also lacks variance information; please state whether these are single-seed results or provide standard deviations.
  6. [General] No code release is mentioned, which would substantially aid reproducibility given the number of new components (SFRM, PosFuse, multi-interest routing).

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Fairness gains are scored by the paper's own SFRM, which is co-trained with FairGENRec and controls its diffusion; the headline Macro-F1 improvements are not independently established.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 5.1.2 (Baselines) and Section 4.4.1 Eq.(13), Algorithm 2]
    "In addition, we apply the SFRM from this paper to all baseline models and compute Macro-F1 by predicting sensitive features based on the output of baselines for fairness evaluation."

    The SFRM used to score fairness is not an external probe: Eq.(13) co-trains it with the denoising model (L = LM + λI LI + λF LF), and Algorithm 2 uses it to stop forward diffusion when precognize ≤ 0.5. FairGENRec's output representations are therefore optimized in a loop with this exact classifier, so the classifier's Macro-F1 on FairGENRec outputs is partly a measure of its own adaptation. Applying the same SFRM to baselines makes the reported 49.91%/46.42%/38.22% Macro-F1 improvements a fitted-input result rather than an independent fairness estimate; no SFRM accuracy or calibration on the evaluated outputs, and no alternative fairness metric, is reported.

full rationale

The accuracy results (HR/NDCG in Table 3) are standard ranking metrics and are independent of the model's internal design; those comparisons are not circular and support the accuracy side of the dual-enhancement claim. The fairness side, however, is confounded: the Macro-F1 values in Table 3 are produced by the paper's own SFRM, which is co-trained with FairGENRec in Eq.(13) and which determines the forward-diffusion stopping point in Algorithm 2 (stop when precognize ≤ 0.5). Using that same fitted classifier to score baselines and FairGENRec means the reported fairness improvements partly reflect the classifier's adaptation to FairGENRec's representation geometry rather than a neutral measurement of sensitive-feature leakage. The paper reports no SFRM accuracy or calibration on the evaluated outputs and no independent fairness metric. This is a fitted-input-called-prediction issue, but it is limited to the fairness evaluation: the accuracy claim retains independent content, so the overall circularity is moderate.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central claim depends on several manually chosen or tuned quantities: the maximum diffusion step, the noise schedule, the loss weights, the number of interest capsules, the warm-up epochs, and the per-dataset sensitive-feature definitions. The most consequential invented component is the SFRM, which is simultaneously the debiasing guide and the fairness measurement instrument, creating a self-referential evaluation. The standard diffusion and routing equations are imported from prior work and are not independently verified here.

free parameters (6)
  • Maximum diffusion step N = 15
    Tuned among [1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30] on validation data, as described in Section 5.3.1.
  • Noise schedule = mutual information, beta_t = (T-t-1)^-1
    Selected among linear, sqrt, mutual information, and cosine schedules based on validation performance in Section 5.3.1; the formula as given is not derived and does not match the cited D3PM formulation.
  • Loss weights lambda_I and lambda_F
    Weights for fairness and SFRM losses in Eq. (13); values are not reported in the paper.
  • Number of interest capsules M = 3
    Set to 3 in Section 5.1.3 with no ablation on this hyperparameter.
  • Warm-up epochs k
    Defined in Algorithm 2 but no value is specified anywhere in the paper.
  • User-sensitive feature definitions = average score (Beauty), gender (ML-1M), engagement (Yelp)
    Chosen by the authors as the axes of unfairness per dataset in Table 2; no external justification is given for why these are the operative bias dimensions.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Diffusion forward and reverse equations from DDPM (Ho et al., 2020)
    Section 3 adopts the standard DDPM formulation for the forward and reverse processes.
  • standard math Dynamic routing capsule algorithm from MIND (Li et al., 2019)
    Section 4.3.2 uses the dynamic routing algorithm for multi-interest extraction, citing [45].
  • ad hoc to paper SFRM classification confidence <= 0.5 indicates sensitive-feature removal
    The diffusion stopping rule in Section 4.2.1 assumes this threshold is a meaningful debiasing criterion; no calibration evidence is provided.
  • domain assumption Orthogonality regularizer (Eq. 8) removes sensitive bias from multi-interest embeddings
    The paper assumes that penalizing cosine similarity between interest vectors and the sensitive feature embedding achieves debiasing.
  • domain assumption Macro-F1 evaluated with SFRM is an accepted fairness metric
    Section 5.1.1 cites [37] for Macro-F1 but applies it via the paper's own classifier, which is not an established protocol.
invented entities (3)
  • Sensitive Feature Recognize Model (SFRM)
    purpose: Guides how much noise to add per user sequence and scores fairness for all models
    A Transformer classifier with a class token; no external falsifiable handle exists for it, and its use as both guide and evaluator drives the reported fairness numbers.
  • PosFuse network
    purpose: Learns the fusion gate lambda_t between clean and noised item embeddings
    A small two-layer MLP introduced in Eq. (6); its only evidence of value is the internal ablation.
  • User-sensitive and user-insensitive towers
    purpose: Two-stage personalization that swaps sensitive features for insensitive features
    Stage one debiases interests, stage two personalizes; the trade-off is evaluated only via ablations within this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Alleviating User-Sensitive bias with Fair Generative Sequential Recommendation Model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5VV26TMV

@misc{pith2026250619777,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Alleviating User-Sensitive bias with Fair Generative Sequential Recommendation Model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5VV26TMV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.19777}
}
read the original abstract

Recommendation fairness has recently attracted much attention. In the real world, recommendation systems are driven by user behavior, and since users with the same sensitive feature (e.g., gender and age) tend to have the same patterns, recommendation models can easily capture the strong correlation preference of sensitive features and thus cause recommendation unfairness. Diffusion model (DM) as a new generative model paradigm has achieved great success in recommendation systems. DM's ability to model uncertainty and represent diversity, and its modeling mechanism has a high degree of adaptability with the real-world recommendation process with bias. Therefore, we use DM to effectively model the fairness of recommendation and enhance the diversity. This paper proposes a FairGENerative sequential Recommendation model based on DM, FairGENRec. In the training phase, we inject random noise into the original distribution under the guidance of the sensitive feature recognition model, and a sequential denoise model is designed for the reverse reconstruction of items. Simultaneously, recommendation fairness modeling is completed by injecting multi-interests representational information that eliminates the bias of sensitive user features into the generated results. In the inference phase, the model obtains the noise in the form of noise addition by using the history interactions which is followed by reverse iteration to reconstruct the target item representation. Finally, our extensive experiments on three datasets demonstrate the dual enhancement effect of FairGENRec on accuracy and fairness, while the statistical analysis of the cases visualizes the degree of improvement on the fairness of the recommendation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.19777 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The figure illustrates the forward (diffusion) phase for training and the reverse (reconstructed) phase for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overall of proposed sequential denoise architecture. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Performance influence of different maximum diffusion steps and different noise schedules. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Fairness comparison on Beauty. FairGENRec recommends fewer movies for males in genres such as action and adventure movies, while increasing its recommendation of romance and children, which are more likely to be liked by females. In addition, it increases the number of…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Fairness comparison on ML-1M. 6 Conclusion In this work, considering recommendation unfairness caused by user-sensitive features, we propose a generative sequen￾tial recommendation model called FairGENRec, which is based on the DM and achieves generative recommendation…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Fairness comparison on Yelp. items by injecting random noise under the guidance of the sensitive feature recognition model and reverse reconstruction with the help of sequential denoise model. At the same time, we eliminate the user-sensitive feature bias embedded in m…

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Recurrent neural networks with top-k gains for session-based recommendations

    Balázs Hidasi and Alexandros Karatzoglou. Recurrent neural networks with top-k gains for session-based recommendations. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM international conference on information and knowledge management, pages 843–852, 2018

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Parallel recurrent neural network architectures for feature-rich session-based recommendations

    Balázs Hidasi, Massimo Quadrana, Alexandros Karatzoglou, and Domonkos Tikk. Parallel recurrent neural network architectures for feature-rich session-based recommendations. InProceedings of the 10th ACM conference on recommender systems, pages 241–248, 2016

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Personalizing session-based recommendations with hierarchical recurrent neural networks

    Massimo Quadrana, Alexandros Karatzoglou, Balázs Hidasi, and Paolo Cremonesi. Personalizing session-based recommendations with hierarchical recurrent neural networks. In proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, pages 130–137, 2017

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Self-attentive sequential recommendation

    Wang-Cheng Kang and Julian McAuley. Self-attentive sequential recommendation. In 2018 IEEE international conference on data mining (ICDM), pages 197–206. IEEE, 2018

    2018

  5. [5]

    Bert4rec: Sequential recommen- dation with bidirectional encoder representations from transformer

    Fei Sun, Jun Liu, Jian Wu, Changhua Pei, Xiao Lin, Wenwu Ou, and Peng Jiang. Bert4rec: Sequential recommen- dation with bidirectional encoder representations from transformer. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM international conference on information and knowledge management, pages 1441–1450, 2019

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Personalized top-n sequential recommendation via convolutional sequence embedding

    Jiaxi Tang and Ke Wang. Personalized top-n sequential recommendation via convolutional sequence embedding. In Proceedings of the eleventh ACM international conference on web search and data mining, pages 565–573, 2018

    2018

  7. [7]

    A simple convolutional generative network for next item recommendation

    Fajie Yuan, Alexandros Karatzoglou, Ioannis Arapakis, Joemon M Jose, and Xiangnan He. A simple convolutional generative network for next item recommendation. In Proceedings of the twelfth ACM international conference on web search and data mining, pages 582–590, 2019

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    Session-based recommendation with graph neural networks

    Shu Wu, Yuyuan Tang, Yanqiao Zhu, Liang Wang, Xing Xie, and Tieniu Tan. Session-based recommendation with graph neural networks. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 33, pages 346–353, 2019

    work page 2019

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    Memory augmented graph neural networks for sequential recommendation

    Chen Ma, Liheng Ma, Yingxue Zhang, Jianing Sun, Xue Liu, and Mark Coates. Memory augmented graph neural networks for sequential recommendation. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 34, pages 5045–5052, 2020. 13 A PREPRINT - S EPTEMBER 23, 2025

    2020

  2. [10]

    Modeling sequences as distributions with uncertainty for sequential recommendation

    Ziwei Fan, Zhiwei Liu, Shen Wang, Lei Zheng, and Philip S Yu. Modeling sequences as distributions with uncertainty for sequential recommendation. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM international conference on information & knowledge management, pages 3019–3023, 2021

    2021

  3. [11]

    Solving the apparent diversity-accuracy dilemma of recommender systems

    Tao Zhou, Zoltán Kuscsik, Jian-Guo Liu, Matúš Medo, Joseph Rushton Wakeling, and Yi-Cheng Zhang. Solving the apparent diversity-accuracy dilemma of recommender systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(10):4511–4515, 2010

    2010

  4. [12]

    Denoising diffusion probabilistic models

    Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising diffusion probabilistic models. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020

    2020

  5. [13]

    Diffurec: A diffusion model for sequential recommendation

    Zihao Li, Aixin Sun, and Chenliang Li. Diffurec: A diffusion model for sequential recommendation. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 42(3):1–28, 2023

    2023

  6. [14]

    An mdp-based recommender system

    Guy Shani, David Heckerman, Ronen I Brafman, and Craig Boutilier. An mdp-based recommender system. Journal of machine Learning research, 6(9), 2005

    2005

  7. [15]

    Factorizing personalized markov chains for next-basket recommendation

    Steffen Rendle, Christoph Freudenthaler, and Lars Schmidt-Thieme. Factorizing personalized markov chains for next-basket recommendation. In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web, pages 811–820, 2010

    2010

  8. [16]

    Translation-based recommendation

    Ruining He, Wang-Cheng Kang, and Julian McAuley. Translation-based recommendation. In Proceedings of the eleventh ACM conference on recommender systems, pages 161–169, 2017

    2017

  9. [17]

    Empirical evaluation of gated recurrent neural networks on sequence modeling

    Junyoung Chung, Caglar Gulcehre, KyungHyun Cho, and Yoshua Bengio. Empirical evaluation of gated recurrent neural networks on sequence modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.3555, 2014

    2014 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Long short-term memory

    Sepp Hochreiter and Jürgen Schmidhuber. Long short-term memory. Neural computation, 9(8):1735–1780, 1997

    1997

  11. [19]

    Attention is all you need

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  12. [20]

    Auto-encoding variational bayes

    Diederik P Kingma and Max Welling. Auto-encoding variational bayes. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6114, 2013

    2013 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Generative adversarial networks

    Ian Goodfellow, Jean Pouget-Abadie, Mehdi Mirza, Bing Xu, David Warde-Farley, Sherjil Ozair, Aaron Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. Generative adversarial networks. Communications of the ACM, 63(11):139–144, 2020

    2020

  14. [22]

    Mvae: Multimodal variational autoen- coder for fake news detection

    Dhruv Khattar, Jaipal Singh Goud, Manish Gupta, and Vasudeva Varma. Mvae: Multimodal variational autoen- coder for fake news detection. In The world wide web conference, pages 2915–2921, 2019

    2019

  15. [23]

    Adversarial and contrastive variational autoencoder for sequential recommendation

    Zhe Xie, Chengxuan Liu, Yichi Zhang, Hongtao Lu, Dong Wang, and Yue Ding. Adversarial and contrastive variational autoencoder for sequential recommendation. In Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021 , pages 449–459, 2021

    2021

  16. [24]

    Recgan: recurrent generative adversarial networks for recommendation systems

    Homanga Bharadhwaj, Homin Park, and Brian Y Lim. Recgan: recurrent generative adversarial networks for recommendation systems. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, pages 372–376, 2018

    2018

  17. [25]

    Sequential recommendation with self-attentive multi-adversarial network

    Ruiyang Ren, Zhaoyang Liu, Yaliang Li, Wayne Xin Zhao, Hui Wang, Bolin Ding, and Ji-Rong Wen. Sequential recommendation with self-attentive multi-adversarial network. In Proceedings of the 43rd international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retri...

    2020

  18. [26]

    Understanding posterior collapse in generative latent variable models

    James Lucas, George Tucker, Roger Grosse, and Mohammad Norouzi. Understanding posterior collapse in generative latent variable models. 2019

    2019

  19. [27]

    Infovae: Balancing learning and inference in variational autoencoders

    Shengjia Zhao, Jiaming Song, and Stefano Ermon. Infovae: Balancing learning and inference in variational autoencoders. In Proceedings of the aaai conference on artificial intelligence, volume 33, pages 5885–5892, 2019

    2019

  20. [28]

    Improved techniques for training gans

    Tim Salimans, Ian Goodfellow, Wojciech Zaremba, Vicki Cheung, Alec Radford, and Xi Chen. Improved techniques for training gans. Advances in neural information processing systems, 29, 2016

    2016

  21. [29]

    Improved variational inference with inverse autoregressive flow

    Durk P Kingma, Tim Salimans, Rafal Jozefowicz, Xi Chen, Ilya Sutskever, and Max Welling. Improved variational inference with inverse autoregressive flow. Advances in neural information processing systems, 29, 2016

    2016

  22. [30]

    Diffusion recommender model

    Wenjie Wang, Yiyan Xu, Fuli Feng, Xinyu Lin, Xiangnan He, and Tat-Seng Chua. Diffusion recommender model. In Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pages 832–841, 2023

    2023

  23. [31]

    Discrete conditional diffusion for reranking in recommendation

    Xiao Lin, Xiaokai Chen, Chenyang Wang, Hantao Shu, Linfeng Song, Biao Li, et al. Discrete conditional diffusion for reranking in recommendation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.06982, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Diffusion augmentation for sequential recommendation

    Qidong Liu, Fan Yan, Xiangyu Zhao, Zhaocheng Du, Huifeng Guo, Ruiming Tang, and Feng Tian. Diffusion augmentation for sequential recommendation. In Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pages 1576–1586, 2023. 14 A PREPRIN...

    2023

  25. [33]

    Fairness in recommendation: Foundations, methods, and applications

    Yunqi Li, Hanxiong Chen, Shuyuan Xu, Yingqiang Ge, Juntao Tan, Shuchang Liu, and Yongfeng Zhang. Fairness in recommendation: Foundations, methods, and applications. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 14(5):1–48, 2023

    2023

  26. [34]

    User-oriented fairness in recommen- dation

    Yunqi Li, Hanxiong Chen, Zuohui Fu, Yingqiang Ge, and Yongfeng Zhang. User-oriented fairness in recommen- dation. In Proceedings of the web conference 2021, pages 624–632, 2021

    2021

  27. [35]

    Beyond parity: Fairness objectives for collaborative filtering

    Sirui Yao and Bert Huang. Beyond parity: Fairness objectives for collaborative filtering. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  28. [36]

    Privacy-aware recommendation with private-attribute protection using adversarial learning

    Ghazaleh Beigi, Ahmadreza Mosallanezhad, Ruocheng Guo, Hamidreza Alvari, Alexander Nou, and Huan Liu. Privacy-aware recommendation with private-attribute protection using adversarial learning. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, p...

    2020

  29. [37]

    Fairness-aware news recommendation with decomposed adversarial learning

    Chuhan Wu, Fangzhao Wu, Xiting Wang, Yongfeng Huang, and Xing Xie. Fairness-aware news recommendation with decomposed adversarial learning. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 35, pages 4462–4469, 2021

    2021

  30. [38]

    Toward pareto efficient fairness-utility trade-off in recommendation through reinforcement learning

    Yingqiang Ge, Xiaoting Zhao, Lucia Yu, Saurabh Paul, Diane Hu, Chu-Cheng Hsieh, and Yongfeng Zhang. Toward pareto efficient fairness-utility trade-off in recommendation through reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the fifteenth ACM international conference on web search a...

    2022

  31. [39]

    Balancing accuracy and fairness for interactive recommendation with reinforcement learning

    Weiwen Liu, Feng Liu, Ruiming Tang, Ben Liao, Guangyong Chen, and Pheng Ann Heng. Balancing accuracy and fairness for interactive recommendation with reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.13386, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  32. [40]

    On discrimination discovery and removal in ranked data using causal graph

    Yongkai Wu, Lu Zhang, and Xintao Wu. On discrimination discovery and removal in ranked data using causal graph. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining, pages 2536–2544, 2018

    2018

  33. [41]

    Disentangling user interest and conformity for recommendation with causal embedding

    Yu Zheng, Chen Gao, Xiang Li, Xiangnan He, Yong Li, and Depeng Jin. Disentangling user interest and conformity for recommendation with causal embedding. In Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021, pages 2980–2991, 2021

    2021

  34. [42]

    U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation

    Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention–MICCAI 2015: 18th international conference, Munich, Germany, October 5-9, 2015, proceedings, part ...

    2015

  35. [43]

    Deep unsupervised learning using nonequilibrium thermodynamics

    Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Eric Weiss, Niru Maheswaranathan, and Surya Ganguli. Deep unsupervised learning using nonequilibrium thermodynamics. In International conference on machine learning, pages 2256–2265. PMLR, 2015

    2015

  36. [44]

    Dynamic routing between capsules

    Sara Sabour, Nicholas Frosst, and Geoffrey E Hinton. Dynamic routing between capsules. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  37. [45]

    Multi-interest network with dynamic routing for recommendation at tmall

    Chao Li, Zhiyuan Liu, Mengmeng Wu, Yuchi Xu, Huan Zhao, Pipei Huang, Guoliang Kang, Qiwei Chen, Wei Li, and Dik Lun Lee. Multi-interest network with dynamic routing for recommendation at tmall. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM international conference on information and knowledg...

    2019

  38. [46]

    Controllable multi-interest framework for recommendation

    Yukuo Cen, Jianwei Zhang, Xu Zou, Chang Zhou, Hongxia Yang, and Jie Tang. Controllable multi-interest framework for recommendation. InProceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining, pages 2942–2951, 2020

    2020

  39. [47]

    Personalized transfer of user preferences for cross-domain recommendation

    Yongchun Zhu, Zhenwei Tang, Yudan Liu, Fuzhen Zhuang, Ruobing Xie, Xu Zhang, Leyu Lin, and Qing He. Personalized transfer of user preferences for cross-domain recommendation. In Proceedings of the fifteenth ACM international conference on web search and data mining, pages 1507...

    2022

  40. [48]

    Sequential recommendation via stochastic self-attention

    Ziwei Fan, Zhiwei Liu, Yu Wang, Alice Wang, Zahra Nazari, Lei Zheng, Hao Peng, and Philip S Yu. Sequential recommendation via stochastic self-attention. In Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022, pages 2036–2047, 2022

    2022

  41. [49]

    Selective fairness in recommendation via prompts

    Yiqing Wu, Ruobing Xie, Yongchun Zhu, Fuzhen Zhuang, Ao Xiang, Xu Zhang, Leyu Lin, and Qing He. Selective fairness in recommendation via prompts. In Proceedings of the 45th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, pages 2657–2662, 2022

    2022

  42. [50]

    Diffusion-lm improves controllable text generation

    Xiang Li, John Thickstun, Ishaan Gulrajani, Percy S Liang, and Tatsunori B Hashimoto. Diffusion-lm improves controllable text generation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:4328–4343, 2022

    2022

  43. [51]

    Structured denoising diffusion models in discrete state-spaces

    Jacob Austin, Daniel D Johnson, Jonathan Ho, Daniel Tarlow, and Rianne Van Den Berg. Structured denoising diffusion models in discrete state-spaces. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34:17981–17993, 2021

    2021

  44. [52]

    Improved denoising diffusion probabilistic models

    Alexander Quinn Nichol and Prafulla Dhariwal. Improved denoising diffusion probabilistic models. In Interna- tional conference on machine learning, pages 8162–8171. PMLR, 2021. 15

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.