Fairness in Recommender Systems

While the "Matthew Effect" and filter bubbles are widely recognized outcome-level biases in recommender systems, we reveal that Diffusion Recommender Models (DRMs) uniquely compound this issue through their generative dynamics. Rather than merely inheriting data imbalances, DRMs trigger a self-reinforcing amplification of popularity bias. We identify that this phenomenon is driven by two compounding mechanisms. First, while optimization loss is universally dominated by high-frequency items across recommenders, DRMs suffer from a unique structural prior mismatch during generation. Because the forward terminal distribution of long-tailed data deviates significantly from the standard Gaussian prior, reverse sampling trajectories inherently collapse toward high-density popular items, fundamentally suppressing niche item generation. To dismantle this self-reinforcing loop, we propose FairDiff, a plug-and-play fairness-aware diffusion framework. To overcome the popularity-dominated loss, we introduce Popularity Condition Guidance (PCG). Rather than altering the training objective, PCG acts as an inference-time distributional reweighting mechanism, mathematically reshaping the score-based gradient field to penalize high-popularity regions and guide trajectories toward niche semantics. Furthermore, we design a Semantic Calibration (SC) Module to bridge the prior mismatch, aligning the forward and reverse distributions via one-step optimal transport. Comprehensive evaluations demonstrate that FairDiff achieves state-of-the-art performance while effectively mitigating the self-reinforcing Matthew Effect, highlighting its value as a general framework for DRMs.

Semantic ID (SID)-based generative recommendation has recently achieved remarkable success. However, existing methods suffer from a previously overlooked fairness issue, which we term Token Frequency Bias, where high-frequency SID tokens are systematically over-predicted while low-frequency SID tokens are under-predicted. This bias originates from the combined effects of imbalanced semantic codebooks during SID construction, and popularity bias together with the maximum likelihood estimation objective during recommendation training, resulting in unfair exposure across item categories. Existing SID methods mainly focus on improving codebook quality and overlook the impact of token frequency imbalance on downstream recommendation fairness, while LLM debiasing methods often yield suboptimal results when directly applied to SID-based recommendation, due to the hierarchical semantics of SID tokens. To address this issue, we propose FSGR, a fairness optimization framework for SID-based generative recommendation. During SID construction, FSGR employs OT-based Assignment Optimization and Dual-Criteria Re-anchor mechanism to form a more balanced SID representation space. During recommendation training, it adopts a two-stage training strategy and introduces Hierarchical Frequency Calibration for layer-specific fairness fine-tuning. Experiments on three public datasets with three backbone models demonstrate that FSGR mitigates token frequency bias and delivers an average Gini fairness improvement of over 20% while maintaining competitive recommendation accuracy.

Fairness audits for LLM-based recommenders have largely focused on observable outputs, implicitly assuming that stable recommendations reflect stable internal processing. We challenge this assumption with FairGap, the first benchmark to jointly evaluate recommendation fairness at two levels: observable output shift (OBS) and hidden representation shift (IBS), measured through controlled counterfactual identity probes across gender, age, and race. Their relationship is summarized via Representation-Output Alignment (ROA), with quadrant diagnostics for identifying user-level hidden-output mismatch. Applied to six open-weight LLM families across three domains, FairGap reveals pervasive hidden-output decoupling: ROA rarely exceeds 0.22, and a non-negligible user population shows stable outputs despite substantial internal shifts, a mode that output-only audits cannot detect by design. Further, activation steering that reduces IBS by up to 8x simultaneously worsens OBS, demonstrating a fundamental tension between internal and output-level fairness that existing frameworks are unequipped to diagnose.

The unfairness of recommender systems has become a topic of concern due to its significant social and ethical implications. Although existing works have shown the effectiveness of attacks on the performance of recommender systems (e.g., promotion and demotion attack), the study of fairness attacks on recommender systems remains largely under-explored. To this end, we propose a novel structure-aware reinforcement learning-based fairness attack method designed to exacerbate the unfairness of target recommender systems. Specifically, we first employ a graph-based structure encoder to model the structural dependencies among the generated fake user-item interactions and the original user-item interactions. Then, we model the sequential dependency of the injected fake items using a recurrent neural network. Based on the learned structure-aware and sequence-aware representations of the fake user and item, the item selection policy attentively decides the next injected fake item. Since the target recommender system may employ fairness-aware training and leverage the user's sensitive attribute information, such as gender, we further designed a gender selection policy to decide the gender of the entire fake user profile. Both the item selection and gender selection policy are learned jointly in our proposed method. Finally, experimental results on four types of target recommendation models and two real-world datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed attack method in exacerbating the unfairness of recommender systems.

Fayyazi et al. (2025) recently proposed FACTER, a model-agnostic framework designed to jointly enforce fairness and statistical coverage in LLM-based recommendation through conformal thresholding and iterative prompt repair. In this work, we conduct a reproducibility study of the FACTER framework across diverse architectures and dataset sparsity levels, evaluating both the original open-ended generation task and a constrained re-ranking extension. Under the strict reproduction, we observe a divergence in recommendation utility, which we trace to underspecified target-set evaluation in the original study. We then use the constrained re-ranking setting to evaluate FACTER when the candidate set is fixed, and introduce a static Fair Zero-Shot baseline to isolate the contribution of the iterative prompt repair loop. Our analysis shows that FACTER consistently reduces adaptive-threshold violation counts, but that these reductions are not consistently reflected under the fixed threshold or in global fairness metrics. In the constrained ranking setting, static fairness instructions achieve comparable semantic-parity outcomes to FACTER's dynamic repair loop, suggesting that the additional online repair mechanism provides limited benefit in this formulation. All code and reproduction artifacts are available at https://github.com/oscar-omlf/facter-repr.

User interactions in online recommendation platforms create interdependencies among content creators: feedback on one creator's content influences the system's learning and, in turn, the exposure of other creators' contents. To analyze incentives in such settings, we model collaboration as a multi-agent stochastic linear bandit problem with a transferable utility (TU) cooperative game formulation, where a coalition's value equals the negative sum of its members' cumulative regrets. We show that, for identical (homogenous) agents with fixed action sets, the induced TU game is convex under mild algorithmic conditions, implying a non-empty core that contains the Shapley value and ensures both stability and fairness. For heterogeneous agents, the game still admits a non-empty core, though convexity and Shapley value core-membership are no longer guaranteed. To address this, we propose a simple regret-based payout rule that satisfies three out of the four Shapley axioms and also lies in the core. Experiments on MovieLens-100k dataset illustrate when the empirical payout aligns with -- and diverges from -- the Shapley fairness across different settings and algorithms.

Fairness-aware recommender systems often mitigate bias by increasing exposure to under-represented or long-tail content, commonly through mechanisms that promote novelty and diversity. In practice, the strength of such interventions is typically controlled using global hyperparameters, fixed regularization weights, heuristic caps, or offline tuning strategies. These approaches implicitly assume that a single level of exploration is appropriate across users, contexts, and stages of interaction. In this work, we study exploration saturation as a user-dependent phenomenon arising from fairness- and novelty-driven recommendation strategies. We define exploration saturation as the point at which further increases in exploration no longer improve user utility and may instead reduce engagement or perceived relevance. Rather than proposing a new fairness-aware algorithm or optimizing a specific objective, we empirically analyze how increasing exploration affects users across varied recommendation models. Through longitudinal experiments using MovieLens-1M and Last.fm datasets, our results indicate that fairness-induced exploration exhibits diminishing or non-monotonic returns and varies substantially across users. In particular, users with limited interaction histories tend to reach saturation earlier, suggesting that uniform fairness or novelty pressure can disproportionately disadvantage certain users. These findings reveal a trade-off between fairness and user experience, suggesting that recommendation systems should adapt not only to relevance but also to the amount of fairness-driven exploration applied to individual users.

One of the many fairness definitions pursued in recent recommender system research targets mitigating demographic information encoded in model representations. Models optimized for this definition are typically evaluated on how well demographic attributes can be classified given model representations, with the (implicit) assumption that this measure accurately reflects recommendation parity, i.e., how similar recommendations given to different users are. We challenge this assumption by comparing the amount of demographic information encoded in representations with various measures of how the recommendations differ. We propose two new approaches for measuring how well demographic information can be classified given ranked recommendations. Our results from extensive testing of multiple models on one real and multiple synthetically generated datasets indicate that optimizing for fair representations positively affects recommendation parity, but also that evaluation at the representation level is not a good proxy for measuring this effect when comparing models. We also provide extensive insight into how recommendation-level fairness metrics behave for various models by evaluating their performances on numerous generated datasets with different properties.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have introduced new capabilities to recommender systems, enabling dynamic, context-aware, and conversational recommendations. However, LLM-based recommender systems inherit and may amplify social biases embedded in their pre-training data, especially when demographic cues are present. Existing fairness solutions either require extra parameters fine-tuning, or suffer from optimization instability. We propose a lightweight and scalable bias mitigation method that combines a kernelized Iterative Null-space Projection (INLP) with a gated Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) adapter. Our approach estimates a closed-form projection that removes single or multiple sensitive attributes from LLM representations with no additional trainable parameters. To preserve task utility, we introduce a two-level MoE adapter that selectively restores useful signals without reintroducing bias. Experiments on two public datasets show that our method reduces attribute leakage across multiple protected variables while maintaining competitive recommendation accuracy.

Despite frequent double-blind review, demographic biases of authors still disadvantage the underrepresented groups. We present Fair-PaperRec, a MultiLayer Perceptron (MLP)-based model that addresses demographic disparities in post-review paper acceptance decisions while maintaining high-quality requirements. Our methodology penalizes demographic disparities while preserving quality through intersectional criteria (e.g., race, country) and a customized fairness loss, in contrast to heuristic approaches. Evaluations using conference data from ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction (SIGCHI), Designing Interactive Systems (DIS), and Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) indicate a 42.03% increase in underrepresented group participation and a 3.16% improvement in overall utility, indicating that diversity promotion does not compromise academic rigor and supports equity-focused peer review solutions.

Interactive recommender systems (IRS) are increasingly optimized with Reinforcement Learning (RL) to capture the sequential nature of user-system dynamics. However, existing fairness-aware methods often suffer from a fundamental oversight: they assume the observed user state is a faithful representation of true preferences. In reality, implicit feedback is contaminated by popularity-driven noise and exposure bias, creating a distorted state that misleads the RL agent. We argue that the persistent conflict between accuracy and fairness is not merely a reward-shaping issue, but a state estimation failure. In this work, we propose DSRM-HRL, a framework that reformulates fairness-aware recommendation as a latent state purification problem followed by decoupled hierarchical decision-making. We introduce a Denoising State Representation Module (DSRM) based on diffusion models to recover the low-entropy latent preference manifold from high-entropy, noisy interaction histories. Built upon this purified state, a Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning (HRL) agent is employed to decouple conflicting objectives: a high-level policy regulates long-term fairness trajectories, while a low-level policy optimizes short-term engagement under these dynamic constraints. Extensive experiments on high-fidelity simulators (KuaiRec, KuaiRand) demonstrate that DSRM-HRL effectively breaks the "rich-get-richer" feedback loop, achieving a superior Pareto frontier between recommendation utility and exposure equity.

Item-side fairness is crucial for ensuring the fair exposure of long-tail items in interactive recommender systems. Existing approaches promote the exposure of long-tail items by directly incorporating them into recommended results. This causes misalignment between user preferences and the recommended long-tail items, which hinders long-term user engagement and reduces the effectiveness of recommendations. We aim for a proactive fairness-guiding strategy, which actively guides user preferences toward long-tail items while preserving user satisfaction during the interactive recommendation process. To this end, we propose HRL4PFG, an interactive recommendation framework that leverages hierarchical reinforcement learning to guide user preferences toward long-tail items progressively. HRL4PFG operates through a macro-level process that generates fairness-guided targets based on multi-step feedback, and a micro-level process that fine-tunes recommendations in real time according to both these targets and evolving user preferences. Extensive experiments show that HRL4PFG improves cumulative interaction rewards and maximum user interaction length by a larger margin when compared with state-of-the-art methods in interactive recommendation environments.

Despite frequent double-blind review, systemic biases related to author demographics still disadvantage underrepresented groups. We start from a simple hypothesis: if a post-review recommender is trained with an explicit fairness regularizer, it should increase inclusion without degrading quality. To test this, we introduce Fair-PaperRec, a Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) with a differentiable fairness loss over intersectional attributes (e.g., race, country) that re-ranks papers after double-blind review. We first probe the hypothesis on synthetic datasets spanning high, moderate, and near-fair biases. Across multiple randomized runs, these controlled studies map where increasing the fairness weight strengthens macro/micro diversity while keeping utility approximately stable, demonstrating robustness and adaptability under varying disparity levels. We then carry the hypothesis into the original setting, conference data from ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction (SIGCHI), Designing Interactive Systems (DIS), and Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI). In this real-world scenario, an appropriately tuned configuration of Fair-PaperRec achieves up to a 42.03% increase in underrepresented-group participation with at most a 3.16% change in overall utility relative to the historical selection. Taken together, the synthetic-to-original progression shows that fairness regularization can act as both an equity mechanism and a mild quality regularizer, especially in highly biased regimes. By first analyzing the behavior of the fairness parameters under controlled conditions and then validating them on real submissions, Fair-PaperRec offers a practical, equity-focused framework for post-review paper selection that preserves, and in some settings can even enhance, measured scholarly quality.

Recommender Systems (RSs) are exploited by various business enterprises to suggest their products (items) to consumers (users). Collaborative filtering (CF) is a widely used variant of RSs which learns hidden patterns from user-item interactions for recommending items to users. Recommendations provided by the traditional CF models are often biased. Generally, such models learn and update embeddings for all the users, thereby overlooking the biases toward each under-served users individually. This leads to certain users receiving poorer recommendations than the rest. Such unfair treatment toward users incur loss to the business houses. There is limited research which addressed individual user unfairness problem (IUUP). Existing literature employed explicit exploration-based multi-armed bandits, individual user unfairness metric, and explanation score to address this issue. Although, these works elucidate and identify the underlying individual user unfairness, however, they do not provide solutions for it. In this paper, we propose a dual-step approach which identifies and mitigates IUUP in recommendations. In the proposed work, we counterfactually introduce new interactions to the candidate users (one at a time) and subsequently analyze the benefit from this perturbation. This improves the user engagement with other users and items. Thus, the model can learn effective embeddings across the users. To showcase the effectiveness of the proposed counterfactual methodology, we conducted experiments on MovieLens-100K, Amazon Beauty and MovieLens-1M datasets. The experimental results validate the superiority of the proposed approach over the existing techniques.

The digital services economy consists of online platforms that facilitate interactions between service providers and consumers. This ecosystem is characterized by short-term, often one-off, transactions between parties that have no prior familiarity. To establish trust among users, platforms employ rating systems which allow users to report on the quality of their previous interactions. However, while arguably crucial for these platforms to function, rating systems can perpetuate negative biases against marginalised groups. This paper investigates how to design platforms around biased reputation systems, reducing discrimination while maintaining incentives for all service providers to offer high quality service for users. We introduce an evolutionary game theoretical model to study how digital platforms can perpetuate or counteract rating-based discrimination. We focus on the platforms' decisions to promote service providers who have high reputations or who belong to a specific protected group. Our results demonstrate a fundamental trade-off between user experience and fairness: promoting highly-rated providers benefits users, but lowers the demand for marginalised providers against which the ratings are biased. Our results also provide evidence that intervening by tuning the demographics of the search results is a highly effective way of reducing unfairness while minimally impacting users. Furthermore, we show that even when precise measurements on the level of rating bias affecting marginalised service providers is unavailable, there is still potential to improve upon a recommender system which ignores protected characteristics. Altogether, our model highlights the benefits of proactive anti-discrimination design in systems where ratings are used to promote cooperative behaviour.