No abstract

In any ranking system, the retrieval model outputs a single score for a document based on its belief on how relevant it is to a given search query. While retrieval models have continued to improve with the introduction of increasingly complex architectures, few works have investigated a retrieval model's belief in the score beyond the scope of a single value. We argue that capturing the model's uncertainty with respect to its own scoring of a document is a critical aspect of retrieval that allows for greater use of current models across new document distributions, collections, or even improving effectiveness for down-stream tasks. In this paper, we address this problem via an efficient Bayesian framework for retrieval models which captures the model's belief in the relevance score through a stochastic process while adding only negligible computational overhead. We evaluate this belief via a ranking based calibration metric showing that our approximate Bayesian framework significantly improves a retrieval model's ranking effectiveness through a risk aware reranking as well as its confidence calibration. Lastly, we demonstrate that this additional uncertainty information is actionable and reliable on down-stream tasks represented via cutoff prediction. CCS CONCEPTS• Information systems → Information retrievals; Retrieval models and ranking; • Computer systems organization → Neural networks.

No abstract

Several studies have identified discrepancies between the popularity of items in user profiles and the corresponding recommendation lists. Such behavior, which concerns a variety of recommendation algorithms, is referred to as popularity bias. Existing work predominantly adopts simple statistical measures, such as the difference of mean or median popularity, to quantify popularity bias.Moreover, it does so irrespective of user characteristics other than the inclination to popular content. In this work, in contrast, we propose to investigate popularity differences (between the user profile and recommendation list) in terms of median, a variety of statistical moments, as well as similarity measures that consider the entire popularity distributions (Kullback-Leibler divergence and Kendall's rank-order correlation). This results in a more detailed picture of the characteristics of popularity bias. Furthermore, we investigate whether such algorithmic popularity bias affects users of different genders in the same way. We focus on music recommendation and conduct experiments on the recently released standardized LFM-2b dataset, containing listening profiles of Last.fm users. We investigate the algorithmic popularity bias of seven common recommendation algorithms (five collaborative filtering and two baselines). Our experiments show that (1) the studied metrics provide novel insights into popularity bias in comparison with only using average differences, (2) algorithms less inclined towards popularity bias amplification do not necessarily perform worse in terms of utility (NDCG), (3) the majority of the investigated recommenders intensify the popularity bias of the female users.