Simpson's Paradox in Behavioral Curves: How Aggregation Distorts Parametric Models of User Dynamics

Popularity bias in recommendation systems arises when a majority user class generates disproportionate interaction data, causing the system to increasingly favour it while degrading recommendation quality for niche users. While extensive empirical evidence of popularity bias exists, the dynamics leading to its emergence are not well understood. In this work, we study the coupled evolution of recommender model updates and user engagement through the lens of dynamical systems. We formulate a stochastic process and analyse its asymptotic behaviour through an ordinary differential equation (ODE) framework grounded in two-time-scale stochastic approximation. We characterise the equilibrium points of this dynamical system, and derive conditions under which popularity bias is provably emergent, as well as conditions under which symmetric retention of all user classes is possible. We conduct experiments on synthetic data and real-world production logs derived from a large-scale commercial music recommendation platform to validate our theoretical results.

Recommender systems trained on user interaction data are susceptible to behavioral intensity imbalance--a systematic distortion arising from heterogeneous engagement patterns across users. This imbalance skews feedback signals such that observed interactions no longer faithfully reflect true preferences, causing models to disproportionately amplify signals from highly active users while underrepresenting others, which ultimately degrades recommendation quality and robustness at scale. To address this issue, we propose a nonparametric contrastive percentile approximation framework, PEARL, that models relative preference signals instead of absolute engagement magnitudes. Building upon relative advantage debiasing, PEARL leverages real contrastive interaction samples to approximate percentile relationships directly, without relying on auxiliary distribution estimation models. We provide theoretical justification demonstrating that such pairwise comparisons yield unbiased estimates of percentile-based preference signals. For broader applicability, we introduce a prediction-based bootstrapping mechanism for percentile smoothing to handle sparse and discrete feedback, alongside a generalized value-weighted formulation and a co-training strategy to enhance both modeling flexibility and representation learning. Extensive offline experiments demonstrate that PEARL effectively mitigates behavioral bias and consistently improves recommendation performance across multiple ranking targets. Deployed in a production livestream platform with a combined user base of billions, online A/B testing confirms substantial real-world gains: +2.10% Watch Duration, +0.80% Consumption Amount, +1.49% Interaction Rate, and -6.91% Report Rate.

Many decision-support settings require systems that adapt to individual users, but evaluation data for this problem remain limited. Existing benchmarks for user understanding often rely on simulated users or model-generated behavior, even though recent work cautions that model-based simulations can diverge systematically from human behavior. We introduce \textsc{BehaviorBench}, a benchmark for evaluating personalized decision modeling from real-world behavioral traces. \textsc{BehaviorBench} reconstructs wallet-level decision histories from observed public prediction-market and on-chain records, and organizes them into two complementary task layers: \emph{Belief prediction}, which predicts a user's final revealed stance and confidence in a market, and \emph{Trade prediction}, which predicts the direction and amount of individual transactions. Across 2,000 evaluation wallets, the benchmark contains 141,445 Belief instances and 1,485,972 Trade instances, with disjoint support pools for retrieval-based evaluation. We evaluate frontier and open-weight generative models under four history interfaces: no personalization, direct recent history, generated user profiles, and retrieved support-wallet evidence. Personalization improves Belief prediction more consistently than Trade prediction, model rankings change across task layers and metrics, and different history interfaces expose different failure modes. \textsc{BehaviorBench} provides an evaluation setting for studying whether personalized methods can use real-world behavioral evidence rather than simulated users alone.