FARE: Deep Reinforcement Learning For Fair Exposure Constrained Uncertainty Aware Financial Content Personalization
Organizations: JPMorganChase Palo Alto, CA, USA · JPMorganChase London, UK
Abstract
Content personalization systems in financial services must ensure fair exposure across diverse offerings-a requirement driven by contractual obligations and the need to prevent "rich-get-richer" dynamics where content with high click-through rate (CTR) dominates while other relevant products receive minimal visibility. Share of Voice (SOV) constraints, which guarantee each content category a target fraction of top-position exposure, address this by promoting product diversity and balanced user discovery. While re-ranking layers atop CTR models are common in practice, we propose two key novelties: (1) framing SOV-constrained ranking as a deep reinforcement learning problem analogous to constrained trade execution in algorithmic finance, and (2) explicitly incorporating CTR prediction uncertainty into the agent's state space and policy design-enabling larger ranking adjustments for high-uncertainty predictions where deviation from CTR-optimal ordering is less costly. We introduce FARE (Fair Ranking Executor), a modular uncertainty-aware execution layer that translates any black-box CTR model's predictions into SOV-fair rankings without retraining the underlying model. Our uncertainty-weighted proportional control policy (FARE-PC) and learned neural policies (FARE-ES, FARE-PPO) demonstrate that uncertainty-aware approaches can substantially reduce SOV deviation from fairness targets while minimizing engagement loss, with gradient-free evolution strategies outperforming policy gradient methods on synthetic data and the ordering reversing on KuaiRand-Pure.
Figures & tables
| Method | SOV Error | Reduction | PWCL% | Pos. Disp. | Kendall | Top-1 Chg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTR-Only (= TS) | 0.247 0.002 | – | 0.00% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.0% |
| Max-Deficit | 0.000 0.000 | 100.0% | 11.74 0.29% | – | – | – |
| Quota-CTR | 0.073 0.008 | 70.4% | 9.89 0.11% | 1.39 0.01 | 0.42 0.00 | 23.4 1.3% |
| FARE-PC | 0.024 0.000 | 90.3% | 2.64% | 1.58 | 0.49 | 79.3% |
| FARE-ES | 0.034 0.004 | 86.2% | 2.79 0.2% | 1.58 0.001 | 0.49 0.001 | 79.4 0.1% |
| FARE-PPO | 0.155 0.080 | 37.2% | 1.50 0.1% | 1.56 0.02 | 0.48 0.01 | 78.5 0.7% |
| Method | SOV Error | Reduction | PWCL% | Pos. Disp. | Kendall | Top-1 Chg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTR-Only | 0.122 0.005 | – | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.0% |
| FARE-PC | 0.010 0.001 | 91.8% | 0.19 0.01% | 1.59 0.003 | 0.497 0.001 | 79.8 0.2% |
| FARE-ES | 0.099 0.009 | 18.9% | 0.06 0.01% | 1.59 0.004 | 0.494 0.001 | 79.5 0.2% |
| FARE-PPO | 0.089 0.032 | 27.0% | 0.10 0.08% | 1.59 0.006 | 0.495 0.003 | 79.6 0.3% |
Appendix figures & tables11 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | T5 | SOV Error | Reduction | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTR-Only | 23.4 | 19.2 | 22.7 | 19.6 | 15.1 | 0.122 | – |
| FARE-PC | 20.3 | 19.9 | 20.2 | 19.9 | 19.7 | 0.010 | 91.8% |
| FARE-ES | 22.1 | 18.9 | 22.7 | 19.6 | 16.7 | 0.099 | 18.9% |
| FARE-PPO | 21.8 | 19.2 | 21.5 | 19.9 | 17.6 | 0.089 | 27.0% |
| Target | 20.0 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 0.000 | – |
| Method | SOV Error | PWCL% | Pos. Disp. | Kendall | Top-1 Chg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTR-Only | 0.547 0.003 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.0% |
| FARE-PC | 0.116 0.001 | 5.31 0.02% | 1.62 0.001 | 0.508 0.000 | 80.8 0.1% |
| FARE-ES | 0.120 0.003 | 4.92 0.18% | 1.61 0.003 | 0.505 0.001 | 80.6 0.1% |
| FARE-PPO | 0.367 0.144 | 2.24 1.59% | 1.57 0.023 | 0.490 0.009 | 79.0 0.9% |
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | T5 | SOV Error | Reduction | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTR-Only | 28.0 | 23.6 | 20.7 | 16.1 | 11.5 | 0.547 | – |
| FARE-PC | 14.6 | 16.2 | 19.0 | 22.8 | 27.4 | 0.116 | 78.8% |
| FARE-ES | 16.0 | 14.1 | 19.2 | 24.0 | 26.7 | 0.120 | 78.1% |
| FARE-PPO | 25.6 | 16.2 | 19.1 | 20.7 | 18.5 | 0.367 | 32.9% |
| Target | 10.0 | 15.0 | 20.0 | 25.0 | 30.0 | 0.000 | – |
| FARE-PC | FARE-ES | FARE-PPO | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scheme | Base | Err. | Red. | PWCL | Err. | Red. | PWCL | Err. | Red. | PWCL |
| Top-1 | .247 | .024 .000 | 90.3% | 2.64% | .034 .004 | 86.2% | 2.79% | .155 .080 | 37.2% | 1.50% |
| Top-3 | .137 | .040 .001 | 70.8% | 2.27% | .036 .005 | 73.7% | 2.39% | .114 .023 | 16.8% | 0.63% |
| DCG | .061 | .032 .000 | 47.5% | 1.46% | .067 .005 | 9.8% | 0.32% | .063 .001 | 3.3% | 0.08% |
| FARE-PC | FARE-ES | FARE-PPO | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scheme | Base | Err. | Red. | PWCL | Err. | Red. | PWCL | Err. | Red. | PWCL |
| Top-1 | .122 | .010 .001 | 91.8% | 0.19% | .099 .009 | 18.9% | 0.06% | .089 .032 | 27.0% | 0.10% |
| Top-3 | .063 | .017 .001 | 72.6% | 0.16% | .055 .012 | 12.7% | 0.04% | .047 .016 | 25.4% | 0.09% |
| DCG | .030 | .015 .001 | 49.6% | 0.11% | .029 .001 | 3.3% | 0.01% | .025 .009 | 16.7% | 0.05% |
| FARE-PC | FARE-ES | FARE-PPO | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOV | PWCL | Div | SOV | PWCL | Div | SOV | PWCL | Div | |
| 0.0 | .024 | 2.64% | 2.383 | .034 | 2.71% | 2.398 | .172 | 1.34% | 2.339 |
| 0.5 | .010 | 2.83% | 2.402 | .048 | 2.85% | 2.409 | .099 | 2.41% | 2.414 |
| 1.0 | .043 | 3.03% | 2.405 | .049 | 2.83% | 2.409 | .122 | 2.28% | 2.416 |
| 2.0 | .175 | 3.87% | 2.427 | .063 | 2.86% | 2.415 | .120 | 1.86% | 2.399 |
| 5.0 | .632 | 6.69% | 2.471 | .088 | 3.10% | 2.427 | .119 | 2.19% | 2.414 |
| FARE-PC | FARE-ES | FARE-PPO | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| K | Base SOV Err. | Err. | Red. | PWCL | Err. | Red. | PWCL | Err. | Red. | PWCL |
| 3 | 0.252 | .014 .000 | 94.4% | 2.45% | .030 .012 | 88.1% | 2.41% | .169 .086 | 32.9% | 0.96% |
| 5 | 0.247 | .024 .000 | 90.3% | 2.64% | .034 .004 | 86.2% | 2.79% | .155 .080 | 37.2% | 1.50% |
| 7 | 0.249 | .039 .001 | 84.3% | 2.73% | .055 .003 | 77.9% | 2.78% | .158 .047 | 36.5% | 1.82% |
| 10 | 0.253 | .058 .001 | 77.1% | 2.87% | .066 .026 | 73.9% | 3.49% | .251 .012 | 0.8% | 0.11% |
Learning to Rank
Learning to rank develops models that order items by relevance or utility for search, recommendations, and other decisions.
See all 273 papers