Computational Versus Perceived Popularity Miscalibration in Recommender Systems

Oleg Lesota, Gustavo Escobedo, Yashar Deldjoo, B. Ferwerda, Simone Kopeinik, E. Lex, Navid Rekabsaz, M. Schedl
{"title":"Computational Versus Perceived Popularity Miscalibration in Recommender Systems","authors":"Oleg Lesota, Gustavo Escobedo, Yashar Deldjoo, B. Ferwerda, Simone Kopeinik, E. Lex, Navid Rekabsaz, M. Schedl","doi":"10.1145/3539618.3591964","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Popularity bias in recommendation lists refers to over-representation of popular content and is a challenge for many recommendation algorithms. Previous research has suggested several offline metrics to quantify popularity bias, which commonly relate the popularity of items in users' recommendation lists to the popularity of items in their interaction history. Discrepancies between these two factors are referred to as popularity miscalibration. While popularity metrics provide a straightforward and well-defined means to measure popularity bias, it is unknown whether they actually reflect users' perception of popularity bias. To address this research gap, we conduct a crowd-sourced user study on Prolific, involving 56 participants, to (1) investigate whether the level of perceived popularity miscalibration differs between common recommendation algorithms, (2) assess the correlation between perceived popularity miscalibration and its corresponding quantification according to a common offline metric. We conduct our study in a well-defined and important domain, namely music recommendation using the standardized LFM-2b dataset, and quantify popularity miscalibration of five recommendation algorithms by utilizing Jensen-Shannon distance (JSD). Challenging the findings of previous studies, we observe that users generally do perceive significant differences in terms of popularity bias between algorithms if this bias is framed as popularity miscalibration. In addition, JSD correlates moderately with users' perception of popularity, but not with their perception of unpopularity.","PeriodicalId":425056,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3539618.3591964","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Popularity bias in recommendation lists refers to over-representation of popular content and is a challenge for many recommendation algorithms. Previous research has suggested several offline metrics to quantify popularity bias, which commonly relate the popularity of items in users' recommendation lists to the popularity of items in their interaction history. Discrepancies between these two factors are referred to as popularity miscalibration. While popularity metrics provide a straightforward and well-defined means to measure popularity bias, it is unknown whether they actually reflect users' perception of popularity bias. To address this research gap, we conduct a crowd-sourced user study on Prolific, involving 56 participants, to (1) investigate whether the level of perceived popularity miscalibration differs between common recommendation algorithms, (2) assess the correlation between perceived popularity miscalibration and its corresponding quantification according to a common offline metric. We conduct our study in a well-defined and important domain, namely music recommendation using the standardized LFM-2b dataset, and quantify popularity miscalibration of five recommendation algorithms by utilizing Jensen-Shannon distance (JSD). Challenging the findings of previous studies, we observe that users generally do perceive significant differences in terms of popularity bias between algorithms if this bias is framed as popularity miscalibration. In addition, JSD correlates moderately with users' perception of popularity, but not with their perception of unpopularity.
推荐系统中的计算误差与感知误差
推荐列表中的流行偏差是指流行内容的过度代表,是许多推荐算法面临的挑战。之前的研究已经提出了几个离线度量来量化流行偏差,这通常将用户推荐列表中项目的受欢迎程度与他们互动历史中的项目受欢迎程度联系起来。这两个因素之间的差异被称为流行度偏差。虽然人气指标提供了一种直接而明确的方法来衡量人气偏差,但尚不清楚它们是否真的反映了用户对人气偏差的看法。为了解决这一研究缺口,我们在多产上进行了一项涉及56名参与者的众包用户研究,以(1)调查常见推荐算法之间的感知人气偏差校准水平是否不同,(2)根据常见的离线度量评估感知人气偏差校准与其相应量化之间的相关性。我们使用标准化的LFM-2b数据集对音乐推荐这一定义明确且重要的领域进行了研究,并利用Jensen-Shannon距离(JSD)量化了五种推荐算法的流行度误差。挑战先前研究的结果,我们观察到,如果这种偏差被定义为流行度错误校准,用户通常会感知到算法之间流行度偏差的显著差异。此外,JSD与用户对受欢迎程度的感知适度相关,但与他们对不受欢迎程度的感知无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信