Paper detail

Post-hoc Provider Fairness Adaptation via Hierarchical Exposure Alignment

Provider exposure fairness is crucial for sustaining a healthy content ecosystem and preventing monopolization in recommender systems. Yet, most existing methods either incorporate fairness constraints during model training, requiring expensive retraining when fairness objectives change, or rely on post-hoc reranking with fixed criteria, which lacks adaptability to diverse fairness requirements. To overcome these limitations, we propose Post-hoc Fairness Adaptation (PFA), a lightweight framework that equips a frozen recommender with a fairness adapter, enabling flexible fairness control without retraining the backbone model. Specifically, the fairness adapter learns personalized additive score adjustments from user-item embeddings, which are injected into the original ranking scores to steer provider exposure toward fairness. To train the adapter, we minimize the KL divergence between the actual and the target fair exposure distributions. However, this global objective implicitly treats all providers equally, ignoring structural disparities such as imbalanced provider group sizes and heterogeneous exposure within groups. Consequently, fairness may appear satisfied at an aggregate level while severe inter-group and intra-group exposure imbalances persist, undermining practical fairness. To address this, we design Hierarchical Exposure Fairness Alignment (HEFA), which explicitly balances inter- and intra-group provider exposure disparities, enabling flexible adaptation to diverse fairness requirements. To mitigate potential accuracy degradation, PFA jointly optimizes HEFA with a differentiable NDCG loss, enabling end-to-end fairness optimization while preserving ranking quality. Extensive experiments on three public datasets demonstrate that PFA achieves substantial fairness gains with negligible accuracy loss, consistently outperforming strong baselines.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.