An official website of the United States government
Selecting the best items in a dataset is a common task in data exploration. However, the concept of “best” lies in the eyes of the beholder: different users may consider different attributes more important and, hence, arrive at different rankings. Nevertheless, one can remove “dominated” items and create a “representative” subset of the data, comprising the “best items” in it. A Pareto-optimal representative is guaranteed to contain the best item of each possible ranking, but it can be a large portion of data. A much smaller representative can be found if we relax the requirement of including the best item for each user and, instead, just limit the users’ “regret”. Existing work defines regret as the loss in score by limiting consideration to the representative instead of the full dataset, for any chosen ranking function. However, the score is often not a meaningful number, and users may not understand its absolute value. Sometimes small ranges in score can include large fractions of the dataset. In contrast, users do understand the notion of rank ordering. Therefore, we consider items’ positions in the ranked list in defining the regret and propose the rank-regret representative as the minimal subset of the data containing at least one of the top-k of any possible ranking function. This problem is polynomial time solvable in 2D space but is NP-hard on 3 or more dimensions. We design a suite of algorithms to fulfill different purposes, such as whether relaxation is permitted on k, the result size, or both, whether a distribution is known, whether theoretical guarantees or practical efficiency is important, etc. Experiments on real datasets demonstrate that we can efficiently find small subsets with small rank-regrets.
more »
« less
RRR: Rank-Regret Representative
Selecting the best items in a dataset is a common task in data exploration. However, the concept of “best” lies in the eyes of the beholder: different users may consider different attributes more important, and hence arrive at different rankings. Nevertheless, one can remove “dominated” items and create a “representative” subset of the data, comprising the “best items” in it. A Pareto-optimal representative is guaranteed to contain the best item of each possible ranking, but it can be a large portion of data. A much smaller representative can be found if we relax the requirement to include the best item for each user, and instead just limit the users’ “regret”. Existing work defines regret as the loss in score by limiting consideration to the representative instead of the full data set, for any chosen ranking function. However, the score is often not a meaningful number and users may not understand its absolute value. Sometimes small ranges in score can include large fractions of the data set. In contrast, users do understand the notion of rank ordering. Therefore, we consider the position of the items in the ranked list for defining the regret and propose the rank-regret representative as the minimal subset of the data containing at least one of the top-k of any possible ranking function. This problem is NP-complete. We use a geometric interpretation of items to bound their ranks on ranges of functions and to utilize combinatorial geometry notions for developing effective and efficient approximation algorithms for the problem. Experiments on real datasets demonstrate that we can efficiently find small subsets with small rank-regrets.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1741022
- PAR ID:
- 10108005
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proc. ACM SIGMOD Intl Conf. on Mgmt of Data
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 263 to 280
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Items from a database are often ranked based on a combination of criteria. The weight given to each criterion in the combination can greatly affect the fairness of the produced ranking, for example, preferring men over women. A user may have the flexibility to choose combinations that weigh these criteria differently, within limits. In this paper, we develop a system that helps users choose criterion weights that lead to greater fairness. We consider ranking functions that compute the score of each item as a weighted sum of (numeric) attribute values, and then sort items on their score. Each ranking function can be expressed as a point in a multidimensional space. For a broad range of fairness criteria, including proportionality, we show how to efficiently identify regions in this space that satisfy these criteria. Using this identification method, our system is able to tell users whether their proposed ranking function satisfies the desired fairness criteria and, if it does not, to suggest the smallest modification that does. Our extensive experiments on real datasets demonstrate that our methods are able to find solutions that satisfy fairness criteria effectively (usually with only small changes to proposed weight vectors) and efficiently (in interactive time, after some initial pre-processing).more » « less
-
Ranking algorithms in online platforms serve not only users on the demand side, but also items on the supply side. While ranking has traditionally presented items in an order that maximizes their utility to users, the uneven interactions that different items receive as a result of such a ranking can pose item fairness concerns. Moreover, interaction is affected by various forms of bias, two of which have received considerable attention: position bias and selection bias. Position bias occurs due to lower likelihood of observation for items in lower ranked positions. Selection bias occurs because interaction is not possible with items below an arbitrary cutoff position chosen by the front-end application at deployment time (i.e., showing only the top-kitems). A less studied, third form of bias, trust bias, is equally important, as it makes interaction dependent on rank even after observation, by influencing the item’s perceived relevance. To capture interaction disparity in the presence of all three biases, in this paper we introduce a flexible fairness metric. Using this metric, we develop a post-processing algorithm that optimizes fairness in ranking through greedy exploration and allows a tradeoff between fairness and utility. Our algorithm outperforms state-of-the-art fair ranking algorithms on several datasets.more » « less
-
In this paper, we consider the Collaborative Ranking (CR) problem for recommendation systems. Given a set of pairwise preferences between items for each user, collaborative ranking can be used to rank un-rated items for each user, and this ranking can be naturally used for recommendation. It is observed that collaborative ranking algorithms usually achieve better performance since they directly minimize the ranking loss; however, they are rarely used in practice due to the poor scalability. All the existing CR algorithms have time complexity at least O(|Ω|r) per iteration, where r is the target rank and |Ω| is number of pairs which grows quadratically with number of ratings per user. For example, the Netflix data contains totally 20 billion rating pairs, and at this scale all the current algorithms have to work with significant subsampling, resulting in poor prediction on testing data. In this paper, we propose a new collaborative ranking algorithm called Primal-CR that reduces the time complexity toO(|Ω|+d1d2r), where d1 is number of users and d2 is the averaged number of items rated by a user. Note that d1, d2 is strictly smaller and open much smaller than |Ω|. Furthermore, by exploiting the fact that most data is in the form of numerical ratings instead of pairwise comparisons, we propose Primal-CR++ with O(d1d2(r + log d2)) time complexity. Both algorithms have better theoretical time complexity than existing approaches and also outperform existing approaches in terms of NDCG and pairwise error on real data sets. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first collaborative ranking algorithm capable of working on the full Netflix dataset using all the 20 billion rating pairs, and this leads to a model with much better recommendation compared with previous models trained on subsamples. Finally, compared with classical matrix factorization algorithm which also requires O(d1 d2r) time, our algorithm has almost the same efficiency while making much better recommendations since we consider the ranking loss.more » « less
-
We propose a novel combinatorial inference framework to conduct general uncertainty quantification in ranking problems. We consider the widely adopted Bradley-Terry-Luce (BTL) model, where each item is assigned a positive preference score that determines the Bernoulli distributions of pairwise comparisons’ outcomes. Our proposed method aims to infer general ranking properties of the BTL model. The general ranking properties include the “local” properties such as if an item is preferred over another and the “global” properties such as if an item is among the top K-ranked items. We further generalize our inferential framework to multiple testing problems where we control the false discovery rate (FDR) and apply the method to infer the top-K ranked items. We also derive the information-theoretic lower bound to justify the minimax optimality of the proposed method. We conduct extensive numerical studies using both synthetic and real data sets to back up our theory.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3299869.3300080
