Recommender systems are known to suffer from the popularity bias problem: popular (i.e. frequently rated) items get a lot of exposure while less popular ones are under-represented in the recommendations. Research in this area has been mainly focusing on finding ways to tackle this issue by increasing the number of recommended long-tail items or otherwise the overall catalog coverage. In this paper, however, we look at this problem from the users' perspective: we want to see how popularity bias causes the recommendations to deviate from what the user expects to get from the recommender system. We define three different groups of users according to their interest in popular items (Niche, Diverse and Blockbuster-focused) and show the impact of popularity bias on the users in each group. Our experimental results on a movie dataset show that in many recommendation algorithms the recommendations the users get are extremely concentrated on popular items even if a user is interested in long-tail and non-popular items showing an extreme bias disparity.
And finally, @cite_12 compared different recommendation algorithms in terms of accuracy and popularity bias. In that paper they observed some algorithms concentrate more on popular items than the others. In our work, we are mainly interested in seeing the popularity bias from the users' expectations perspective.
@cite_12
1224564842 2748058847 2732691751 2962847184
Most real-world recommender systems are deployed in a commercial context or designed to represent a value-adding service, e.g., on shopping or Social Web platforms, and typical success indicators for such systems include conversion rates, customer loyalty or sales numbers. In academic research, in contrast, the evaluation and comparison of different recommendation algorithms is mostly based on offline experimental designs and accuracy or rank measures which are used as proxies to assess an algorithm's recommendation quality. In this paper, we show that popular recommendation techniques--despite often being similar when compared with the help of accuracy measures--can be quite different with respect to which items they recommend. We report the results of an in-depth analysis in which we compare several recommendations strategies from different perspectives, including accuracy, catalog coverage and their bias to recommend popular items. Our analyses reveal that some recent techniques that perform well with respect to accuracy measures focus their recommendations on a tiny fraction of the item spectrum or recommend mostly top sellers. We analyze the reasons for some of these biases in terms of algorithmic design and parameterization and show how the characteristics of the recommendations can be altered by hyperparameter tuning. Finally, we propose two novel algorithmic schemes to counter these popularity biases. Many recommendation algorithms suffer from popularity bias in their output: popular items are recommended frequently and less popular ones rarely, if at all. However, less popular, long-tail items are precisely those that are often desirable recommendations. In this paper, we introduce a flexible regularization-based framework to enhance the long-tail coverage of recommendation lists in a learning-to-rank algorithm. We show that regularization provides a tunable mechanism for controlling the trade-off between accuracy and coverage. Moreover, the experimental results using two data sets show that it is possible to improve coverage of long tail items without substantial loss of ranking performance. Algorithms that favor popular items are used to help us select among many choices, from top-ranked search engine results to highly-cited scientific papers. The goal of these algorithms is to identify high-quality items such as reliable news, credible information sources, and important discoveries–in short, high-quality content should rank at the top. Prior work has shown that choosing what is popular may amplify random fluctuations and lead to sub-optimal rankings. Nonetheless, it is often assumed that recommending what is popular will help high-quality content “bubble up” in practice. Here we identify the conditions in which popularity may be a viable proxy for quality content by studying a simple model of a cultural market endowed with an intrinsic notion of quality. A parameter representing the cognitive cost of exploration controls the trade-off between quality and popularity. Below and above a critical exploration cost, popularity bias is more likely to hinder quality. But we find a narrow intermediate regime of user attention where an optimal balance exists: choosing what is popular can help promote high-quality items to the top. These findings clarify the effects of algorithmic popularity bias on quality outcomes, and may inform the design of more principled mechanisms for techno-social cultural markets. Most recommender systems recommend a list of items. The user examines the list, from the first item to the last, and often chooses the first attractive item and does not examine the rest. This type of user behavior can be modeled by the cascade model. In this work, we study cascading bandits, an online learning variant of the cascade model where the goal is to recommend K most attractive items from a large set of L candidate items. We propose two algorithms for solving this problem, which are based on the idea of linear generalization. The key idea in our solutions is that we learn a predictor of the attraction probabilities of items from their features, as opposing to learning the attraction probability of each item independently as in the existing work. This results in practical learning algorithms whose regret does not depend on the number of items L. We bound the regret of one algorithm and comprehensively evaluate the other on a range of recommendation problems. The algorithm performs well and outperforms all baselines.