skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Correcting for Selection Bias in Learning-to-rank Systems
Click data collected by modern recommendation systems are an important source of observational data that can be utilized to train learning-to-rank (LTR) systems. However, these data suffer from a number of biases that can result in poor performance for LTR systems. Recent methods for bias correction in such systems mostly focus on position bias, the fact that higher ranked results (e.g., top search engine results) are more likely to be clicked even if they are not the most relevant results given a user’s query. Less attention has been paid to correcting for selection bias, which occurs because clicked documents are reflective of what documents have been shown to the user in the first place. Here, we propose new counterfactual approaches which adapt Heckman's two-stage method and accounts for selection and position bias in LTR systems. Our empirical evaluation shows that our proposed methods are much more robust to noise and have better accuracy compared to existing unbiased LTR algorithms, especially when there is moderate to no position bias.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1801644
PAR ID:
10148671
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Proceedings of the The Web Conference (WWW)
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; (, Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society)
    As learning-to-rank models are increasingly deployed for decision-making in areas with profound life implications, the FairML community has been developing fair learning-to-rank (LTR) models. These models rely on the availability of sensitive demographic features such as race or sex. However, in practice, regulatory obstacles and privacy concerns protect this data from collection and use. As a result, practitioners may either need to promote fairness despite the absence of these features or turn to demographic inference tools to attempt to infer them. Given that these tools are fallible, this paper aims to further understand how errors in demographic inference impact the fairness performance of popular fair LTR strategies. In which cases would it be better to keep such demographic attributes hidden from models versus infer them? We examine a spectrum of fair LTR strategies ranging from fair LTR with and without demographic features hidden versus inferred to fairness-unaware LTR followed by fair re-ranking. We conduct a controlled empirical investigation modeling different levels of inference errors by systematically perturbing the inferred sensitive attribute. We also perform three case studies with real-world datasets and popular open-source inference methods. Our findings reveal that as inference noise grows, LTR-based methods that incorporate fairness considerations into the learning process may increase bias. In contrast, fair re-ranking strategies are more robust to inference errors. All source code, data, and experimental artifacts of our experimental study are available here: https://github.com/sewen007/hoiltr.git 
    more » « less
  2. ; (, ACM)
    When interacting with information retrieval (IR) systems, users, affected by confirmation biases, tend to select search results that confirm their existing beliefs on socially significant contentious issues. To understand the judgments and attitude changes of users searching online, our study examined how cognitively biased users interact with algorithmically biased search engine result pages (SERPs). We designed three-query search sessions on debated topics under various bias conditions. We recruited 1,321 crowdsourcing participants and explored their attitude changes, search interactions, and the effects of confirmation bias. Three key findings emerged: 1) most attitude changes occur in the initial query of a search session; 2) Confirmation bias and result presentation on SERPs affect the number and depth of clicks in the current query and perceived familiarity with clicked results in subsequent queries; 3) The bias position also affects attitude changes of users with lower perceived openness to conflicting opinions. Our study goes beyond traditional simulation-based evaluation settings and simulated rational users, sheds light on the mixed effects of human biases and algorithmic biases in information retrieval tasks on debated topics, and can inform the design of bias-aware user models, human-centered bias mitigation techniques, and socially responsible intelligent IR systems. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; (, Digital)
    Machine learning (ML) has become increasingly prevalent in various domains. However, ML algorithms sometimes give unfair outcomes and discrimination against certain groups. Thereby, bias occurs when our results produce a decision that is systematically incorrect. At various phases of the ML pipeline, such as data collection, pre-processing, model selection, and evaluation, these biases appear. Bias reduction methods for ML have been suggested using a variety of techniques. By changing the data or the model itself, adding more fairness constraints, or both, these methods try to lessen bias. The best technique relies on the particular context and application because each technique has advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, in this paper, we present a comprehensive survey of bias mitigation techniques in machine learning (ML) with a focus on in-depth exploration of methods, including adversarial training. We examine the diverse types of bias that can afflict ML systems, elucidate current research trends, and address future challenges. Our discussion encompasses a detailed analysis of pre-processing, in-processing, and post-processing methods, including their respective pros and cons. Moreover, we go beyond qualitative assessments by quantifying the strategies for bias reduction and providing empirical evidence and performance metrics. This paper serves as an invaluable resource for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers seeking to navigate the intricate landscape of bias in ML, offering both a profound understanding of the issue and actionable insights for responsible and effective bias mitigation. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; (, PLOS ONE)
    Srinivasan, Kathiravan (Ed.)
    Despite their satisfactory performance, most existing listwise Learning-To-Rank (LTR) models do not consider the crucial issue of robustness. A data set can be contaminated in various ways, including human error in labeling or annotation, distributional data shift, and malicious adversaries who wish to degrade the algorithm’s performance. It has been shown that Distributionally Robust Optimization (DRO) is resilient against various types of noise and perturbations. To fill this gap, we introduce a new listwise LTR model called Distributionally Robust Multi-output Regression Ranking (DRMRR) . Different from existing methods, the scoring function of DRMRR was designed as a multivariate mapping from a feature vector to a vector of deviation scores, which captures local context information and cross-document interactions. In this way, we are able to incorporate the LTR metrics into our model. DRMRR uses a Wasserstein DRO framework to minimize a multi-output loss function under the most adverse distributions in the neighborhood of the empirical data distribution defined by a Wasserstein ball. We present a compact and computationally solvable reformulation of the min-max formulation of DRMRR. Our experiments were conducted on two real-world applications: medical document retrieval and drug response prediction, showing that DRMRR notably outperforms state-of-the-art LTR models. We also conducted an extensive analysis to examine the resilience of DRMRR against various types of noise: Gaussian noise, adversarial perturbations, and label poisoning. Accordingly, DRMRR is not only able to achieve significantly better performance than other baselines, but it can maintain a relatively stable performance as more noise is added to the data. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; (, Association for Computational Linguistics)
    We propose a novel supervised learning approach for political ideology prediction (PIP) that is capable of predicting out-of-distribution inputs. This problem is motivated by the fact that manual data-labeling is expensive, while self-reported labels are often scarce and exhibit significant selection bias. We propose a novel statistical model that decomposes the document embeddings into a linear superposition of two vectors; a latent neutral context vector independent of ideology, and a latent position vector aligned with ideology. We train an end-to-end model that has intermediate contextual and positional vectors as outputs. At deployment time, our model predicts labels for input documents by exclusively leveraging the predicted positional vectors. On two benchmark datasets we show that our model is capable of outputting predictions even when trained with as little as 5% biased data, and is significantly more accurate than the state-of-the-art. Through crowd-sourcing we validate the neutrality of contextual vectors, and show that context filtering results in ideological concentration, allowing for prediction on out-of-distribution examples. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email