Paper detail

Using Stable Matching to Optimize the Balance between Accuracy and Diversity in Recommendation

Increasing aggregate diversity (or catalog coverage) is an important system-level objective in many recommendation domains where it may be desirable to mitigate the popularity bias and to improve the coverage of long-tail items in recommendations given to users. This is especially important in multistakeholder recommendation scenarios where it may be important to optimize utilities not just for the end user, but also for other stakeholders such as item sellers or producers who desire a fair representation of their items across recommendation lists produced by the system. Unfortunately, attempts to increase aggregate diversity often result in lower recommendation accuracy for end users. Thus, addressing this problem requires an approach that can effectively manage the trade-offs between accuracy and aggregate diversity. In this work, we propose a two-sided post-processing approach in which both user and item utilities are considered. Our goal is to maximize aggregate diversity while minimizing loss in recommendation accuracy. Our solution is a generalization of the Deferred Acceptance algorithm which was proposed as an efficient algorithm to solve the well-known stable matching problem. We prove that our algorithm results in a unique user-optimal stable match between items and users. Using three recommendation datasets, we empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in comparison to several baselines. In particular, our results show that the proposed solution is quite effective in increasing aggregate diversity and item-side utility while optimizing recommendation accuracy for end users.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.