Balancing Unobserved Confounding with a Few Unbiased Ratings in Debiased Recommendations

Authors: Haoxuan Li, Yanghao Xiao, Chunyuan Zheng, Peng Wu

Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2023 (WWW '23), April 30-May 4, 2023, Austin, TX, USA
Accepted Paper in WWW'23
License: CC0 1.0

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2304.09085v1

  • Comprehensive Summary
  • Key points
  • Layman's Summary
  • Blog article
Recommender systems have become an essential tool to address information overload. However, the presence of various biases in large-scale observational data often results in sub-optimal prediction performance. To combat this issue, recent works proposed using unbiased ratings obtained from randomized controlled trials or A/B tests to correct the parameters of propensity or imputation models trained on biased datasets. However, existing methods fail to obtain accurate predictions in the presence of unobserved confounding or model misspecification. To address these limitations, Trovato et al. propose a theoretically guaranteed model-agnostic balancing approach that can be applied to any existing debiasing method. The proposed approach makes full use of unbiased data by alternatively correcting model parameters learned with biased data and adaptively learning balance coefficients of biased samples for further debiasing. The paper also discusses various approaches developed for achieving unbiased learning such as inverse propensity score (IPS) strategy, doubly robust (DR) loss, multiple robust learning method and adversarial learning method. Additionally, the authors highlight the challenges associated with addressing unmeasured confounding in causal inference and discuss sensitivity analysis and auxiliary information-based methods for obtaining unbiased causal effect estimators. The proposed balancing optimization training objective is demonstrated through extensive real-world experiments on two datasets to combat the effects of unobserved confounding and model misspecification. The study shows that leveraging a small uniform dataset can achieve exact unbiasedness in debiased recommendations. Overall, this paper presents a novel approach to combating biases in recommender systems by fully exploiting the unbiasedness property of a small uniform dataset while addressing unobserved confounding and model misspecification. Future work includes deriving theoretical generalization error bounds for balancing approaches and exploring more effective ways to enhance debiasing performance using unbiased ratings.
AI-generated keywords: Recommender systems Unbiased ratings Unobserved confounding Model misspecification Balancing approach

AI-generated Key Points

  • Recommender systems are important to address information overload
  • Biases in large-scale observational data can result in sub-optimal prediction performance
  • Unbiased ratings obtained from randomized controlled trials or A/B tests can correct biases, but existing methods have limitations
  • Trovato et al. propose a theoretically guaranteed model-agnostic balancing approach that can be applied to any existing debiasing method
  • The proposed approach makes full use of unbiased data by correcting model parameters learned with biased data and adaptively learning balance coefficients of biased samples for further debiasing
  • Various approaches developed for achieving unbiased learning such as inverse propensity score (IPS) strategy, doubly robust (DR) loss, multiple robust learning method and adversarial learning method are discussed
  • Challenges associated with addressing unmeasured confounding in causal inference are highlighted and sensitivity analysis and auxiliary information-based methods are discussed for obtaining unbiased causal effect estimators.
  • The proposed balancing optimization training objective is demonstrated through extensive real-world experiments on two datasets to combat the effects of unobserved confounding and model misspecification.
  • Leveraging a small uniform dataset can achieve exact unbiasedness in debiased recommendations.
  • Future work includes deriving theoretical generalization error bounds for balancing approaches and exploring more effective ways to enhance debiasing performance using unbiased ratings.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Abstract: Recommender systems are seen as an effective tool to address information overload, but it is widely known that the presence of various biases makes direct training on large-scale observational data result in sub-optimal prediction performance. In contrast, unbiased ratings obtained from randomized controlled trials or A/B tests are considered to be the golden standard, but are costly and small in scale in reality. To exploit both types of data, recent works proposed to use unbiased ratings to correct the parameters of the propensity or imputation models trained on the biased dataset. However, the existing methods fail to obtain accurate predictions in the presence of unobserved confounding or model misspecification. In this paper, we propose a theoretically guaranteed model-agnostic balancing approach that can be applied to any existing debiasing method with the aim of combating unobserved confounding and model misspecification. The proposed approach makes full use of unbiased data by alternatively correcting model parameters learned with biased data, and adaptively learning balance coefficients of biased samples for further debiasing. Extensive real-world experiments are conducted along with the deployment of our proposal on four representative debiasing methods to demonstrate the effectiveness.

Submitted to arXiv on 17 Apr. 2023

Tools for this paper

Explain it differently 3 free rewrites left today
Export BibTeX · RIS (Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote) · Markdown (Notion, Obsidian) · Premium
Citation alerts Premium
Journal club Slides to present it Premium
For journalists Press kit and hype check Premium

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

Figures and plots

Ask about a figure by number or use its question button to request visual analysis. Up to two figures and four image panels per question. Values read from plots are approximate; check the original data.

AI assistant instructions?

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.