Skip to content
Open access

Long-Term Fairness-Aware Recommendation via Adaptive Fairness Metric Selection

Aug 2026 · Information · 0 citations · 28 references

TL;DR

The proposed Long-term Fairness-aware Recommendation via Adaptive Fairness Metric Selection (LFR-via-AFMS) adaptively selects the most appropriate fairness criterion: Equal Opportunity for true causality, and Demographic Parity for spurious correlations, which eliminates unjustified disparities entirely.

Abstract

Fairness in recommendation systems has drawn growing attention due to rising societal and regulatory concerns over algorithmic bias. Existing fairness-aware approaches typically mitigate bias by either removing sensitive attributes via representation learning or leveraging causal-path interventions (e.g., counterfactual or specific-path debiasing) to distinguish genuine causal effects from confounder-induced correlations between sensitive attributes and user preferences. However, when it comes to evaluation, most prior work adopts both Demographic Parity (DP) and Equal Opportunity (EO) as simultaneous criteria, yet overlooks their inherent tension and the causal nature of the sensitive attribute. Specifically, if a sensitive attribute genuinely drives preference variation, enforcing DP forces equal exposure across groups, contradicting natural interest diversity and severely hurting accuracy; conversely, for spurious correlations, relying solely on EO fails to remove confounder-introduced bias. More importantly, these metrics are typically computed in a static, one-shot manner, ignoring that recommendation is an iterative process where even minor initial disparities can be amplified over time through feedback loops, eventually leading to substantial long-term unfairness. Nevertheless, existing studies rarely address such dynamic, long-term fairness implications, leaving a critical gap in both evaluation and optimization. To resolve this, we propose Long-term Fairness-aware Recommendation via Adaptive Fairness Metric Selection (LFR-via-AFMS). Our framework first learns the causal structure to identify whether the sensitive attribute has a genuine causal effect or merely a spurious association with user preferences. Based on this diagnosis, it adaptively selects the most appropriate fairness criterion: Equal Opportunity for true causality, which allows legitimate group differences in preference, and Demographic Parity for spurious correlations, which eliminates unjustified disparities entirely. The adaptively chosen metric is then integrated into an actor–critic reinforcement learning reward to optimize long-term fairness without sacrificing accuracy. Extensive experiments on Alibaba and MovieLens datasets, with five independent runs and statistical significance testing, demonstrate that the proposed method achieves a superior fairness-accuracy trade-off compared with state-of-the-art baselines, and the adaptive metric selection proves indispensable for maintaining both equity and recommendation quality. We validate the causal diagnosis module through simulation studies with known ground truth and sensitivity analyses confirming robustness across threshold choices.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Conference Open access Sep 2026

Learning Counterfactual Fairness from Authentic Generation

Graph Counterfactual Fairness (GCFair), a novel framework that achieves counterfactual fairness by explicitly identifying and disentangling the subsets of node features and graph structures genuinely affected by sensitive attributes, is proposed.

Zi-Chong Wang, Zhi-Peng Yin, Zhong Chen et al. · 3 citations
Conference Open access Sep 2026

A Review of Causal Fairness in E-commerce Recommendation Systems: From Behavior Disentanglement to Counterfactual Intervention

Within online retail, e-commerce recommendation systems occupy a study-defining role, yet they have drawn growing criticism for producing stereotyped or biased outcomes. Conventional fairness metrics —notably demographic parity and equalized odds —treat ever y observed correlation between user attributes and recommenda...

Yu-Shu Zha · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

iCert-Fair: A Human-Preference-Guided Two-Layer Framework for Multi-Objective Fairness Assessment and Harm Recovery in Credit Scoring

The empirical findings support the use of complementary structural and policy-level interventions and demonstrate the importance of jointly evaluating aggregate disparity, worst-case attribute-level harm, cross-attribute transfer, and predictive utility.

Rashed Bahlool, Nabil Hewahi · 0 citations
Book Open access Sep 2026

What Price Fairness? Evaluating Energy – Fairness – Accuracy Trade-off in Recommender Systems

The results show that the green cost of fairness is not uniform, post-processing shifts cost to repeated serving, while in-processing and graph-level methods avoid re-ranking overhead but vary substantially across models, datasets, and hardware.

Abhirup Mitra, Oleg Lesota, Antonela Tommasel · 0 citations
Open access Sep 2026

Individual and group fairness assessments via counterfactual explanations

This study explores the potential of counterfactual explanations to assess artificial intelligence (AI) fairness, especially in critical decision-making systems. Predictive models may amplify biases inherent in data sets or algorithms, and given the absence of a universally accepted fairness metric, a case-specific app...

Federico Sabbatini, Roberta Calegari · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.