Eunice Chan

Hyunsik Yoo, Zhichen Zeng, Jian Kang et al.

User-side group fairness is crucial for modern recommender systems, aiming to alleviate performance disparities among user groups defined by sensitive attributes like gender, race, or age. In the ever-evolving landscape of user-item interactions, continual adaptation to newly collected data is crucial for recommender systems to stay aligned with the latest user preferences. However, we observe that such continual adaptation often exacerbates performance disparities. This necessitates a thorough investigation into user-side fairness in dynamic recommender systems, an area that has been unexplored in the literature. This problem is challenging due to distribution shifts, frequent model updates, and non-differentiability of ranking metrics. To our knowledge, this paper presents the first principled study on ensuring user-side fairness in dynamic recommender systems. We start with theoretical analyses on fine-tuning v.s. retraining, showing that the best practice is incremental fine-tuning with restart. Guided by our theoretical analyses, we propose FAir Dynamic rEcommender (FADE), an end-to-end fine-tuning framework to dynamically ensure user-side fairness over time. To overcome the non-differentiability of recommendation metrics in the fairness loss, we further introduce Differentiable Hit (DH) as an improvement over the recent NeuralNDCG method, not only alleviating its gradient vanishing issue but also achieving higher efficiency. Besides that, we also address the instability issue of the fairness loss by leveraging the competing nature between the recommendation loss and the fairness loss. Through extensive experiments on real-world datasets, we demonstrate that FADE effectively and efficiently reduces performance disparities with little sacrifice in the overall recommendation performance.

Eunice Chan, Hanghang Tong

With the growing adoption of AI and machine learning systems in real-world applications, ensuring their fairness has become increasingly critical. The majority of the work in algorithmic fairness focus on assessing and improving the fairness of machine learning systems. There is relatively little research on fairness vulnerability, i.e., how an AI system's fairness can be intentionally compromised. In this work, we first provide a theoretical analysis demonstrating that a simple adversarial poisoning strategy is sufficient to induce maximally unfair behavior in naive Bayes classifiers. Our key idea is to strategically inject a small fraction of carefully crafted adversarial data points into the training set, biasing the model's decision boundary to disproportionately affect a protected group while preserving generalizable performance. To illustrate the practical effectiveness of our method, we conduct experiments across several benchmark datasets and models. We find that our attack significantly outperforms existing methods in degrading fairness metrics across multiple models and datasets, often achieving substantially higher levels of unfairness with a comparable or only slightly worse impact on accuracy. Notably, our method proves effective on a wide range of models, in contrast to prior work, demonstrating a robust and potent approach to compromising the fairness of machine learning systems.

Lihui Liu, Zihao Wang, Ruizhong Qiu et al.

Despite the superb performance in many tasks, large language models (LLMs) bear the risk of generating hallucination or even wrong answers when confronted with tasks that demand the accuracy of knowledge. The issue becomes even more noticeable when addressing logic queries that require multiple logic reasoning steps. On the other hand, knowledge graph (KG) based question answering methods are capable of accurately identifying the correct answers with the help of knowledge graph, yet its accuracy could quickly deteriorate when the knowledge graph itself is sparse and incomplete. It remains a critical challenge on how to integrate knowledge graph reasoning with LLMs in a mutually beneficial way so as to mitigate both the hallucination problem of LLMs as well as the incompleteness issue of knowledge graphs. In this paper, we propose 'Logic-Query-of-Thoughts' (LGOT) which is the first of its kind to combine LLMs with knowledge graph based logic query reasoning. LGOT seamlessly combines knowledge graph reasoning and LLMs, effectively breaking down complex logic queries into easy to answer subquestions. Through the utilization of both knowledge graph reasoning and LLMs, it successfully derives answers for each subquestion. By aggregating these results and selecting the highest quality candidate answers for each step, LGOT achieves accurate results to complex questions. Our experimental findings demonstrate substantial performance enhancements, with up to 20% improvement over ChatGPT.

Alan Pham, Eunice Chan, Vikranth Srivatsa et al.

Overparameterization is shown to result in poor test accuracy on rare subgroups under a variety of settings where subgroup information is known. To gain a more complete picture, we consider the case where subgroup information is unknown. We investigate the effect of model size on worst-group generalization under empirical risk minimization (ERM) across a wide range of settings, varying: 1) architectures (ResNet, VGG, or BERT), 2) domains (vision or natural language processing), 3) model size (width or depth), and 4) initialization (with pre-trained or random weights). Our systematic evaluation reveals that increasing model size does not hurt, and may help, worst-group test performance under ERM across all setups. In particular, increasing pre-trained model size consistently improves performance on Waterbirds and MultiNLI. We advise practitioners to use larger pre-trained models when subgroup labels are unknown.