BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Juntao Tan

Juntao Tan contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Information RetrievalMachine LearningArtificial Intelligence

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2023arXiv

Causal Inference for Recommendation: Foundations, Methods and Applications

Recommender systems are important and powerful tools for various personalized services. Traditionally, these systems use data mining and machine learning techniques to make recommendations based on correlations found in the data. However, relying solely on correlation without considering the underlying causal mechanism may lead to various practical issues such as fairness, explainability, robustness, bias, echo chamber and controllability problems. Therefore, researchers in related area have begun incorporating causality into recommendation systems to address these issues. In this survey, we review the existing literature on causal inference in recommender systems. We discuss the fundamental concepts of both recommender systems and causal inference as well as their relationship, and review the existing work on causal methods for different problems in recommender systems. Finally, we discuss open problems and future directions in the field of causal inference for recommendations.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Dynamic Causal Collaborative Filtering

Causal graph, as an effective and powerful tool for causal modeling, is usually assumed as a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG). However, recommender systems usually involve feedback loops, defined as the cyclic process of recommending items, incorporating user feedback in model updates, and repeating the procedure. As a result, it is important to incorporate loops into the causal graphs to accurately model the dynamic and iterative data generation process for recommender systems. However, feedback loops are not always beneficial since over time they may encourage more and more narrowed content exposure, which if left unattended, may results in echo chambers. As a result, it is important to understand when the recommendations will lead to echo chambers and how to mitigate echo chambers without hurting the recommendation performance. In this paper, we design a causal graph with loops to describe the dynamic process of recommendation. We then take Markov process to analyze the mathematical properties of echo chamber such as the conditions that lead to echo chambers. Inspired by the theoretical analysis, we propose a Dynamic Causal Collaborative Filtering ($\partial$CCF) model, which estimates users' post-intervention preference on items based on back-door adjustment and mitigates echo chamber with counterfactual reasoning. Multiple experiments are conducted on real-world datasets and results show that our framework can mitigate echo chambers better than other state-of-the-art frameworks while achieving comparable recommendation performance with the base recommendation models.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Explainable Fairness in Recommendation

Existing research on fairness-aware recommendation has mainly focused on the quantification of fairness and the development of fair recommendation models, neither of which studies a more substantial problem--identifying the underlying reason of model disparity in recommendation. This information is critical for recommender system designers to understand the intrinsic recommendation mechanism and provides insights on how to improve model fairness to decision makers. Fortunately, with the rapid development of Explainable AI, we can use model explainability to gain insights into model (un)fairness. In this paper, we study the problem of explainable fairness, which helps to gain insights about why a system is fair or unfair, and guides the design of fair recommender systems with a more informed and unified methodology. Particularly, we focus on a common setting with feature-aware recommendation and exposure unfairness, but the proposed explainable fairness framework is general and can be applied to other recommendation settings and fairness definitions. We propose a Counterfactual Explainable Fairness framework, called CEF, which generates explanations about model fairness that can improve the fairness without significantly hurting the performance.The CEF framework formulates an optimization problem to learn the "minimal" change of the input features that changes the recommendation results to a certain level of fairness. Based on the counterfactual recommendation result of each feature, we calculate an explainability score in terms of the fairness-utility trade-off to rank all the feature-based explanations, and select the top ones as fairness explanations.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Learning and Evaluating Graph Neural Network Explanations based on Counterfactual and Factual Reasoning

Structural data well exists in Web applications, such as social networks in social media, citation networks in academic websites, and threads data in online forums. Due to the complex topology, it is difficult to process and make use of the rich information within such data. Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have shown great advantages on learning representations for structural data. However, the non-transparency of the deep learning models makes it non-trivial to explain and interpret the predictions made by GNNs. Meanwhile, it is also a big challenge to evaluate the GNN explanations, since in many cases, the ground-truth explanations are unavailable. In this paper, we take insights of Counterfactual and Factual (CF^2) reasoning from causal inference theory, to solve both the learning and evaluation problems in explainable GNNs. For generating explanations, we propose a model-agnostic framework by formulating an optimization problem based on both of the two casual perspectives. This distinguishes CF^2 from previous explainable GNNs that only consider one of them. Another contribution of the work is the evaluation of GNN explanations. For quantitatively evaluating the generated explanations without the requirement of ground-truth, we design metrics based on Counterfactual and Factual reasoning to evaluate the necessity and sufficiency of the explanations. Experiments show that no matter ground-truth explanations are available or not, CF^2 generates better explanations than previous state-of-the-art methods on real-world datasets. Moreover, the statistic analysis justifies the correlation between the performance on ground-truth evaluation and our proposed metrics. Source code is available at https://github.com/chrisjtan/gnn_cff.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access