Predictive Uncertainty-based Bias Mitigation in Ranking

Societal biases that are contained in retrieved documents have received increased interest. Such biases, which areoften prevalent in the training data and learned by the model, can cause societal harms, by misrepresenting certain groups, and by enforcing stereotypes. Mitigating such biases demands algorithms that balance the trade-off between maximized utility for the user with fairness objectives, which incentivize unbiased rankings. Prior work on bias mitigation often assumes that ranking scores, which correspond to the utility that a document holds for a user, can be accurately determined. In reality, there is always a degree of uncertainty in the estimate of expected document utility. This uncertainty can be approximated by viewing ranking models through a Bayesian perspective, where the standard deterministic score becomes a distribution. Inthiswork,weinvestigatewhether uncertainty estimatescanbe used to decrease the amount of bias in the ranked results, while minimizing loss in measured utility. We introduce a simple method that uses the uncertainty of the ranking scores for an uncertainty-aware, post hoc approach to bias mitigation. We compare our proposed method with existing baselines for bias mitigation with respect to the utility-fairness trade-off, the controllability of methods, and computational costs. We show that an uncertainty-based approach can provide an intuitive and flexible trade-off that outperforms all baselines without additional training requirements, allowing for the post hoc use of this approach on top of arbitrary retrieval models.

[1]  Michael D. Ekstrand,et al.  Overview of the TREC 2019 Fair Ranking Track , 2020, ArXiv.

[2]  Qingyao Ai,et al.  Marginal-Certainty-Aware Fair Ranking Algorithm , 2022, WSDM.

[3]  Nisheeth K. Vishnoi,et al.  Fair Ranking with Noisy Protected Attributes , 2022, NeurIPS.

[4]  Feng Zhou,et al.  Accelerated Linearized Laplace Approximation for Bayesian Deep Learning , 2022, NeurIPS.

[5]  George Zerveas Mitigating Bias in Search Results Through Contextual Document Reranking and Neutrality Regularization , 2022, SIGIR.

[6]  Qingyao Ai,et al.  Can Clicks Be Both Labels and Features?: Unbiased Behavior Feature Collection and Uncertainty-aware Learning to Rank , 2022, SIGIR.

[7]  Carsten Eickhoff,et al.  Inconsistent Ranking Assumptions in Medical Search and Their Downstream Consequences , 2022, Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval.

[8]  M. de Rijke,et al.  Fairness of Exposure in Light of Incomplete Exposure Estimation , 2022, SIGIR.

[9]  J. Renders,et al.  Pareto-Optimal Fairness-Utility Amortizations in Rankings with a DBN Exposure Model , 2022, SIGIR.

[10]  Julia Stoyanovich,et al.  Fairness in Ranking, Part II: Learning-to-Rank and Recommender Systems , 2022, ACM Comput. Surv..

[11]  Julia Stoyanovich,et al.  Fairness in Ranking, Part I: Score-Based Ranking , 2022, ACM Comput. Surv..

[12]  Dawei Yin,et al.  Incorporating Explicit Knowledge in Pre-trained Language Models for Passage Re-ranking , 2022, SIGIR.

[13]  Gourab K. Patro,et al.  Fair ranking: a critical review, challenges, and future directions , 2022, FAccT.

[14]  Francesco Bonchi,et al.  Fair Top-k Ranking with multiple protected groups , 2022, Inf. Process. Manag..

[15]  M. de Rijke,et al.  Understanding and Mitigating the Effect of Outliers in Fair Ranking , 2021, WSDM.

[16]  M. Zaharia,et al.  ColBERTv2: Effective and Efficient Retrieval via Lightweight Late Interaction , 2021, NAACL.

[17]  Thorsten Joachims,et al.  Fairness in Ranking under Uncertainty , 2021, NeurIPS.

[18]  Carsten Eickhoff,et al.  Not All Relevance Scores are Equal: Efficient Uncertainty and Calibration Modeling for Deep Retrieval Models , 2021, SIGIR.

[19]  Avijit Ghosh,et al.  When Fair Ranking Meets Uncertain Inference , 2021, SIGIR.

[20]  Simone Kopeinik,et al.  Societal Biases in Retrieved Contents: Measurement Framework and Adversarial Mitigation of BERT Rankers , 2021, SIGIR.

[21]  Jimmy J. Lin,et al.  Efficiently Teaching an Effective Dense Retriever with Balanced Topic Aware Sampling , 2021, SIGIR.

[22]  Claudia Hauff,et al.  On the Calibration and Uncertainty of Neural Learning to Rank Models for Conversational Search , 2021, EACL.

[23]  Jimmy J. Lin,et al.  Pretrained Transformers for Text Ranking: BERT and Beyond , 2020, NAACL.

[24]  Thorsten Joachims,et al.  User Fairness, Item Fairness, and Diversity for Rankings in Two-Sided Markets , 2020, ICTIR.

[25]  Gian Antonio Susto,et al.  Gender Stereotype Reinforcement: Measuring the Gender Bias Conveyed by Ranking Algorithms , 2020, Inf. Process. Manag..

[26]  Markus Schedl,et al.  Do Neural Ranking Models Intensify Gender Bias? , 2020, SIGIR.

[27]  Bhaskar Mitra,et al.  Evaluating Stochastic Rankings with Expected Exposure , 2020, CIKM.

[28]  Philipp Hennig,et al.  Being Bayesian, Even Just a Bit, Fixes Overconfidence in ReLU Networks , 2020, ICML.

[29]  Nisheeth K. Vishnoi,et al.  Interventions for ranking in the presence of implicit bias , 2020, FAT*.

[30]  Ming-Wei Chang,et al.  Well-Read Students Learn Better: The Impact of Student Initialization on Knowledge Distillation , 2019, ArXiv.

[31]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  Operationalizing Individual Fairness with Pairwise Fair Representations , 2019, Proc. VLDB Endow..

[32]  Julia Stoyanovich,et al.  Balanced Ranking with Diversity Constraints , 2019, IJCAI.

[33]  Sahin Cem Geyik,et al.  Fairness-Aware Ranking in Search & Recommendation Systems with Application to LinkedIn Talent Search , 2019, KDD.

[34]  Ed H. Chi,et al.  Fairness in Recommendation Ranking through Pairwise Comparisons , 2019, KDD.

[35]  Thorsten Joachims,et al.  Policy Learning for Fairness in Ranking , 2019, NeurIPS.

[36]  Carlos Castillo,et al.  Fairness and Transparency in Ranking , 2019, BIRDS@SIGIR.

[37]  Kyunghyun Cho,et al.  Passage Re-ranking with BERT , 2019, ArXiv.

[38]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  iFair: Learning Individually Fair Data Representations for Algorithmic Decision Making , 2018, 2019 IEEE 35th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE).

[39]  Carlos Castillo,et al.  Reducing Disparate Exposure in Ranking: A Learning To Rank Approach , 2018, WWW.

[40]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  Equity of Attention: Amortizing Individual Fairness in Rankings , 2018, SIGIR.

[41]  Christo Wilson,et al.  Investigating the Impact of Gender on Rank in Resume Search Engines , 2018, CHI.

[42]  Thorsten Joachims,et al.  Fairness of Exposure in Rankings , 2018, KDD.

[43]  David Barber,et al.  A Scalable Laplace Approximation for Neural Networks , 2018, ICLR.

[44]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  Selection Problems in the Presence of Implicit Bias , 2018, ITCS.

[45]  Ricardo Baeza-Yates,et al.  FA*IR: A Fair Top-k Ranking Algorithm , 2017, CIKM.

[46]  Nisheeth K. Vishnoi,et al.  Ranking with Fairness Constraints , 2017, ICALP.

[47]  Tri Minh Nguyen,et al.  MS MARCO: A Human Generated MAchine Reading COmprehension Dataset , 2016 .

[48]  Jianfeng Gao,et al.  MS MARCO: A Human Generated MAchine Reading COmprehension Dataset , 2016, CoCo@NIPS.

[49]  Victor S. Lempitsky,et al.  Unsupervised Domain Adaptation by Backpropagation , 2014, ICML.

[50]  Ingemar J. Cox,et al.  Risk-Aware Information Retrieval , 2009, ECIR.

[51]  S. Robertson The probability ranking principle in IR , 1997 .

[52]  David J. C. MacKay,et al.  A Practical Bayesian Framework for Backpropagation Networks , 1992, Neural Computation.

[53]  Sruthi Gorantla,et al.  On the Problem of Underranking in Group-Fair Ranking , 2021, ICML.

[54]  H. V. Jagadish,et al.  Online Set Selection with Fairness and Diversity Constraints , 2018, EDBT.