Simulating online recommender system performance is notoriously difficult and the discrepancy between the online and offline behaviors is typically not accounted for in offline evaluations. Recommender systems research tends to evaluate model performance on randomly sampled targets, yet the same systems are later used to predict user behavior sequentially from a fixed point in time. This disparity permits weaknesses to go unnoticed until the model is deployed in a production setting. We first demonstrate how omitting temporal context when evaluating recommender system performance leads to false confidence. To overcome this, we propose an offline evaluation protocol modeling the real-life use-case that simultaneously accounts for temporal context. Next, we propose a training procedure to further embed the temporal context in existing models: we introduce it in a multi-objective approach to traditionally time-unaware recommender systems. We confirm the advantage of adding a temporal objective via the proposed evaluation protocol. Finally, we validate that the Pareto Fronts obtained with the added objective dominate those produced by state-of-the-art models that are only optimized for accuracy on three real-world publicly available datasets. The results show that including our temporal objective can improve recall@20 by up to 20%.

The goal of fairness in classification is to learn a classifier that does not discriminate against groups of individuals based on sensitive attributes, such as race and gender. One approach to designing fair algorithms is to use relaxations of fairness notions as regularization terms or in a constrained optimization problem. We observe that the hyperbolic tangent function can approximate the indicator function. We leverage this property to define a differentiable relaxation that approximates fairness notions provably better than existing relaxations. In addition, we propose a model-agnostic multi-objective architecture that can simultaneously optimize for multiple fairness notions and multiple sensitive attributes and supports all statistical parity-based notions of fairness. We use our relaxation with the multi-objective architecture to learn fair classifiers. Experiments on public datasets show that our method suffers a significantly lower loss of accuracy than current debiasing algorithms relative to the unconstrained model.

Multi-objective gradient methods are becoming the standard for solving multi-objective problems. Among others, they show promising results in developing multi-objective recommender systems with both correlated and uncorrelated objectives. Classic multi-gradient descent usually relies on the combination of the gradients, not including the computation of first and second moments of the gradients. This leads to a brittle behavior and misses important areas in the solution space. In this work, we create a multi-objective Adamize method that leverage the benefits of the Adam optimizer in single-objective problems. This corrects and stabilizes the gradients of every objective before calculating a common gradient descent vector that optimizes all the objectives simultaneously. We evaluate the benefits of Multi-objective Adamize on two multi-objective recommender systems and for three different objective combinations, both correlated or uncorrelated. We report significant improvements, measured with three different Pareto front metrics: hypervolume, coverage, and spacing. Finally, we show that the Adamized Pareto front strictly dominates the previous one on multiple objective pairs.

Using personalized explanations to support recommendations has been shown to increase trust and perceived quality. However, to actually obtain better recommendations, there needs to be a means for users to modify the recommendation criteria by interacting with the explanation. We present a novel technique using aspect markers that learns to generate personalized explanations of recommendations from review texts, and we show that human users significantly prefer these explanations over those produced by state-of-the-art techniques. Our work's most important innovation is that it allows users to react to a recommendation by critiquing the textual explanation: removing (symmetrically adding) certain aspects they dislike or that are no longer relevant (symmetrically that are of interest). The system updates its user model and the resulting recommendations according to the critique. This is based on a novel unsupervised critiquing method for single- and multi-step critiquing with textual explanations. Experiments on two real-world datasets show that our system is the first to achieve good performance in adapting to the preferences expressed in multi-step critiquing.

Linking facts across documents is a challenging task, as the language used to express the same information in a sentence can vary significantly, which complicates the task of multi-document summarization. Consequently, existing approaches heavily rely on hand-crafted features, which are domain-dependent and hard to craft, or additional annotated data, which is costly to gather. To overcome these limitations, we present a novel method, which makes use of two types of sentence embeddings: universal embeddings, which are trained on a large unrelated corpus, and domain-specific embeddings, which are learned during training. To this end, we develop SemSentSum, a fully data-driven model able to leverage both types of sentence embeddings by building a sentence semantic relation graph. SemSentSum achieves competitive results on two types of summary, consisting of 665 bytes and 100 words. Unlike other state-of-the-art models, neither hand-crafted features nor additional annotated data are necessary, and the method is easily adaptable for other tasks. To our knowledge, we are the first to use multiple sentence embeddings for the task of multi-document summarization.