System-provided explanations for recommendations are an important component towards transparent and trustworthy AI. In state-of-the-art research, this is a one-way signal, though, to improve user acceptance. In this paper, we turn the role of explanations around and investigate how they can contribute to enhancing the quality of the generated recommendations themselves. We devise a human-in-the-loop framework, called ELIXIR, where user feedback on explanations is leveraged for pairwise learning of user preferences. ELIXIR leverages feedback on pairs of recommendations and explanations to learn user-specific latent preference vectors, overcoming sparseness by label propagation with item-similarity-based neighborhoods. Our framework is instantiated using generalized graph recommendation via Random Walk with Restart. Insightful experiments with a real user study show significant improvements in movie and book recommendations over item-level feedback.
Stony Brook University（石溪大学）；Sapienza University of Rome（罗马第一大学）；The Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University（西交利物浦大学）；Rutgers University（罗格斯大学）；South China Normal University（华南师范大学）
Recently, graph neural networks (GNNs) have been widely used to develop successful recommender systems. Although powerful, it is very difficult for a GNN-based recommender system to attach tangible explanations of why a specific item ends up in the list of suggestions for a given user. Indeed, explaining GNN-based recommendations is unique, and existing GNN explanation methods are inappropriate for two reasons. First, traditional GNN explanation methods are designed for node, edge, or graph classification tasks rather than ranking, as in recommender systems. Second, standard machine learning e…
We present CLEAR, a method for learning session-specific causal graphs, in the possible presence of latent confounders, from attention in pre-trained attention-based recommenders. These causal graphs describe user behavior, within the context captured by attention, and can provide a counterfactual explanation for a recommendation. In essence, these causal graphs allow answering "why" questions uniquely for any specific session. Using empirical evaluations we show that, compared to naively using attention weights to explain input-output relations, counterfactual explanations found by CLEAR are …
Institute of Software Technology Graz University of Technology（格拉茨工业大学软件技术研究所）；Web Information Systems TU Delft（代尔夫特理工大学网络信息系统系）
Explanations are used in recommender systems for various reasons. Users have to be supported in making (high-quality) decisions more quickly. Developers of recommender systems want to convince users to purchase specific items. Users should better understand how the recommender system works and why a specific item has been recommended. Users should also develop a more in-depth understanding of the item domain. Consequently, explanations are designed in order to achieve specific \emph{goals} such as increasing the transparency of a recommendation or increasing a user's trust in the recommender s…
Understanding why specific items are recommended to users can significantly increase their trust and satisfaction in the system. While neural recommenders have become the state-of-the-art in recent years, the complexity of deep models still makes the generation of tangible explanations for end users a challenging problem. Existing methods are usually based on attention distributions over a variety of features, which are still questionable regarding their suitability as explanations, and rather unwieldy to grasp for an end user. Counterfactual explanations based on a small set of the user's own…
University of Washington（华盛顿大学）；Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence（艾伦人工智能研究所）；Northwestern University（西北大学）；University of Washington & Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence（华盛顿大学和艾伦人工智能研究所）
Explanations are well-known to improve recommender systems' transparency. These explanations may be local, explaining an individual recommendation, or global, explaining the recommender model in general. Despite their widespread use, there has been little investigation into the relative benefits of these two approaches. Do they provide the same benefits to users, or do they serve different purposes? We conducted a 30-participant exploratory study and a 30-participant controlled user study with a research-paper recommender system to analyze how providing participants local, global, or both expl…
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne（洛桑联邦理工学院）
Recent studies have shown that providing personalized explanations alongside recommendations increases trust and perceived quality. Furthermore, it gives users an opportunity to refine the recommendations by critiquing parts of the explanations. On one hand, current recommender systems model the recommendation, explanation, and critiquing objectives jointly, but this creates an inherent trade-off between their respective performance. On the other hand, although recent latent linear critiquing approaches are built upon an existing recommender system, they suffer from computational inefficiency …
University of New South Wales（新南威尔士大学）；University of Technology Sydney（悉尼科技大学）；Data61, CSIRO（澳大利亚联邦科学与工业研究组织数据61研究所）
A significant remaining challenge for existing recommender systems is that users may not trust the recommender systems for either lack of explanation or inaccurate recommendation results. Thus, it becomes critical to embrace a trustworthy recommender system. This survey provides a systemic summary of three categories of trust-aware recommender systems: social-aware recommender systems that leverage users' social relationships; robust recommender systems that filter untruthful noises (e.g., spammers and fake information) or enhance attack resistance; explainable recommender systems that provide…
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)（南里奥格兰德联邦大学）；TU Dortmund（多特蒙德工业大学）
With the recent advances in the field of artificial intelligence, an increasing number of decision-making tasks are delegated to software systems. A key requirement for the success and adoption of such systems is that users must trust system choices or even fully automated decisions. To achieve this, explanation facilities have been widely investigated as a means of establishing trust in these systems since the early years of expert systems. With today's increasingly sophisticated machine learning algorithms, new challenges in the context of explanations, accountability, and trust towards such…
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne（洛桑联邦理工学院）
Providing explanations for recommended items allows users to refine the recommendations by critiquing parts of the explanations. As a result of revisiting critiquing from the perspective of multimodal generative models, recent work has proposed M&Ms-VAE, which achieves state-of-the-art performance in terms of recommendation, explanation, and critiquing. M&Ms-VAE and similar models allow users to negatively critique (i.e., explicitly disagree). However, they share a significant drawback: users cannot positively critique (i.e., highlight a desired feature). We address this deficiency with M&Ms-V…
Existing explainable recommender systems have mainly modeled relationships between recommended and already experienced products, and shaped explanation types accordingly (e.g., movie "x" starred by actress "y" recommended to a user because that user watched other movies with "y" as an actress). However, none of these systems has investigated the extent to which properties of a single explanation (e.g., the recency of interaction with that actress) and of a group of explanations for a recommended list (e.g., the diversity of the explanation types) can influence the perceived explaination qualit…
Rutgers University（罗格斯大学）；Renmin University of China（中国人民大学）
State-of-the-art recommender systems have the ability to generate high-quality recommendations, but usually cannot provide intuitive explanations to humans due to the usage of black-box prediction models. The lack of transparency has highlighted the critical importance of improving the explainability of recommender systems. In this paper, we propose to extract causal rules from the user interaction history as post-hoc explanations for the black-box sequential recommendation mechanisms, whilst maintain the predictive accuracy of the recommendation model. Our approach firstly achieves counterfac…
Recommender systems associated with social networks often use social explanations (e.g. "X, Y and 2 friends like this") to support the recommendations. We present a study of the effects of these social explanations in a music recommendation context. We start with an experiment with 237 users, in which we show explanations with varying levels of social information and analyze their effect on users' decisions. We distinguish between two key decisions: the likelihood of checking out the recommended artist, and the actual rating of the artist based on listening to several songs. We find that while…
Recommender Systems have been widely used to help users in finding what they are looking for thus tackling the information overload problem. After several years of research and industrial findings looking after better algorithms to improve accuracy and diversity metrics, explanation services for recommendation are gaining momentum as a tool to provide a human-understandable feedback to results computed, in most of the cases, by black-box machine learning techniques. As a matter of fact, explanations may guarantee users satisfaction, trust, and loyalty in a system. In this paper, we evaluate ho…
Despite the potential impact of explanations on decision making, there is a lack of research on quantifying their effect on users' choices. This paper presents an experimental protocol for measuring the degree to which positively or negatively biased explanations can lead to users choosing suboptimal recommendations. Key elements of this protocol include a preference elicitation stage to allow for personalizing recommendations, manual identification and extraction of item aspects from reviews, and a controlled method for introducing bias through the combination of both positive and negative as…
Recommender systems employ machine learning models to learn from historical data to predict the preferences of users. Deep neural network (DNN) models such as neural collaborative filtering (NCF) are increasingly popular. However, the tangibility and trustworthiness of the recommendations are questionable due to the complexity and lack of explainability of the models. To enable explainability, recent techniques such as ACCENT and FIA are looking for counterfactual explanations that are specific historical actions of a user, the removal of which leads to a change to the recommendation result. I…
From latent factors to language: a user study on LLM-generated explanations for an inherently interpretable matrix-based recommender system
Department of Technological Innovation Management, Faculty of Engineering, University of Mons (UMONS), Mons, Belgium（蒙斯大学工程学院技术创新管理系）；Department of Mathematics and Operational Research, Faculty of Engineering, University of Mons (UMONS), Mons, Belgium（蒙斯大学工程学院数学与运筹学系）；Department of Mathematics（数学系）；Operational Research, Faculty of Engineering, University of Mons (UMONS), Mons, Belgium（运筹学系）
A few Recommender Systems (RS) resort to explanations so as to enhance trust in recommendations. However, current techniques for explanation generation tend to strongly uphold the recommended products instead of presenting both reasons for and reasons against them. We argue that an RS can better enhance overall trust and transparency by frankly displaying both kinds of reasons to users.We have developed such an RS by exploiting knowledge graphs and by applying Snedegar's theory of practical reasoning. We show that our implemented RS has excellent performance and we report on an experiment with…
LLM-Powered Explanations: Unraveling Recommendations Through Subgraph Reasoning
Monash University（莫纳什大学）；Shanghai University of Finance and Economics（上海财经大学）；Bosch Corporate Research（博世企业研究中心）；Bosch(China) Investment Ltd.（博世（中国）投资有限公司）；BSH Home Appliances Holding (China) Co. Ltd（博世和西门子家用电器集团（中国）控股有限公司）；Griffith University（格里菲斯大学）
Recommendations with personalized explanations have been shown to increase user trust and perceived quality and help users make better decisions. Moreover, such explanations allow users to provide feedback by critiquing them. Several algorithms for recommender systems with multi-step critiquing have therefore been developed. However, providing a user-friendly interface based on personalized explanations and critiquing has not been addressed in the last decade. In this paper, we introduce four different web interfaces (available under https://lia.epfl.ch/critiquing/) helping users making decisi…
Though recommender systems are defined by personalization, recent work has shown the importance of additional, beyond-accuracy objectives, such as fairness. Because users often expect their recommendations to be purely personalized, these new algorithmic objectives must be communicated transparently in a fairness-aware recommender system. While explanation has a long history in recommender systems research, there has been little work that attempts to explain systems that use a fairness objective. Even though the previous work in other branches of AI has explored the use of explanations as a to…
Bar-Ilan University（巴伊兰大学）；Weizmann Institute of Science（魏茨曼科学研究所）
Automated platforms which support users in finding a mutually beneficial match, such as online dating and job recruitment sites, are becoming increasingly popular. These platforms often include recommender systems that assist users in finding a suitable match. While recommender systems which provide explanations for their recommendations have shown many benefits, explanation methods have yet to be adapted and tested in recommending suitable matches. In this paper, we introduce and extensively evaluate the use of "reciprocal explanations" -- explanations which provide reasoning as to why both p…
In the era of information overload, recommender systems (RSs) have become an indispensable part of online service platforms. Traditional RSs estimate user interests and predict their future behaviors by utilizing correlations in the observational historical activities, their profiles, and the content of interacted items. However, since the inherent causal reasons that lead to the observed users' behaviors are not considered, multiple types of biases could exist in the generated recommendations. In addition, the causal motives that drive user activities are usually entangled in these RSs, where…
Insight Centre for Data Analytics（洞察数据分析中心）；University College Dublin（都柏林大学学院）；Aalborg University（奥尔堡大学）
An important task for a recommender system to provide interpretable explanations for the user. This is important for the credibility of the system. Current interpretable recommender systems tend to focus on certain features known to be important to the user and offer their explanations in a structured form. It is well known that user generated reviews and feedback from reviewers have strong leverage over the users' decisions. On the other hand, recent text generation works have been shown to generate text of similar quality to human written text, and we aim to show that generated text can be s…
Seoul National University（首尔大学）；Korea University（高丽大学）
A recommender system aims to recommend items that a user is interested in among many items. The need for the recommender system has been expanded by the information explosion. Various approaches have been suggested for providing meaningful recommendations to users. One of the proposed approaches is to consider a recommender system as a Markov decision process (MDP) problem and try to solve it using reinforcement learning (RL). However, existing RL-based methods have an obvious drawback. To solve an MDP in a recommender system, they encountered a problem with the large number of discrete action…
Toward Holistic Evaluation of Recommender Systems Powered by Generative Models
Polytechnic University of Bari（巴里理工大学）；Duke University（杜克大学）；Bespoke Labs（Bespoke实验室）；ETH Zurich（苏黎世联邦理工学院）；Autónoma University of Madrid（马德里自治大学）；University of California, San Diego（加州大学圣地亚哥分校）
