Explaining Neural News Recommendation with Attributions onto Reading Histories

An important aspect of responsible recommendation systems is the transparency of the prediction mechanisms. This is a general challenge for deep-learning-based systems such as the currently predominant neural news recommender architectures which are optimized to predict clicks by matching candidate news items against users’ reading histories. Such systems achieve state-of-the-art click-prediction performance, but the rationale for their decisions is difficult to assess. At the same time, the economic and societal impact of these systems makes such insights very much desirable.

In this paper, we ask the question to what extent the recommendations of current news recommender systems are actually based on content-related evidence from reading histories. We approach this question from an explainability perspective. Building on the concept of integrated gradients, we present a neural news recommender that can accurately attribute individual recommendations to news items and words in input reading histories while maintaining a top scoring click-prediction performance.

Using our method as a diagnostic tool, we find that: (a), a substantial number of users’ clicks on news are not explainable from reading histories, and many history-explainable items are actually skipped; (b), while many recommendations are based on content-related evidence in histories, for others the model does not attend to reasonable evidence, and recommendations stem from a spurious bias in user representations. Our code is publicly available¹.