R. Ungruh
Please Note
11 records found
1
When Preference Is Not Enough
Why Recommender Systems Require Human-Aware Evaluation for Children
Recommender systems increasingly shape children's online experiences, yet the risks they might pose remain poorly understood. Formal risk assessments are rare, overlook children's experiences, treat them as a homogeneous group, and often consider risks on a population-wide level. To provide a more nuanced child-centered perspective on risks associated with recommenders, we conduct a comprehensive risk assessment that examines multiple risks simultaneously and captures individual-level exposure rather than solely aggregated metrics. We also explore behavioral characteristics that make some children more susceptible to risk exposure to grasp how individual differences shape the manifestation of risks. Our results highlight the need for risk assessments that recognize heterogeneity among children and understand when risks become systemic' through individualized recommendation patterns. These insights spark the discussion about child-aware recommenders and ongoing regulatory efforts for evidence-based accountability.
Blurred Lines
Understanding the Fit of Song Lyrics in Music Catalogs That Can Reach Children Through Recommendations
Breaking the loop
A human-centred vision for information retrieval systems that serve all users
Information retrieval (IR) systems have predominantly been designed for and evaluated in mainstream user populations, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of exclusion for underserved groups, e.g. differently-abled individuals, cultural minorities, those facing economic constraints, experiencing digital divides, language barriers, or those at age extremes. This opinion paper presents findings from a collaborative brainstorming session on underrepresented users in IR, identifying key challenges and pathways toward more inclusive design. Our analysis reveals a critical loop: lack of access leads to underrepresentation in datasets, which in turn leads to inadequate consideration in system design, perpetuating exclusion. We present guidelines for breaking this cycle through four interconnected dimensions: interface design grounded in participatory methods and universal accessibility, adaptive algorithms that respond to diverse capabilities and contexts, evaluation methodologies that position underserved users as active collaborators rather than passive subjects, and responsible AI integration guided by user-centred principles.
This PhD project advocates for child-aware recommender systems: systems that explicitly account for children as part of their users, recognizing their distinct needs, vulnerabilities, and rights. In pursuit of this goal, we investigate how well current recommender systems serve children, auditing algorithmic strategies from two complementary perspectives: The ‘traditional’ perspective focuses on whether recommendations align with children’s preferences. The perspective of ‘non-maleficence’ assesses suitability of content recommended, evaluating whether it respects children’s vulnerabilities to potentially harmful material. To do so, we audit current recommender systems according to both perspectives—not only in the short term, but also in the long term through simulation studies. Beyond auditing, we explore strategies and design directions for making recommender systems more responsible. Outcomes from this work should inform both academic and practitioner communities about the gaps in current systems and lay the groundwork for more equitable, safe, and meaningful recommendations for children. ...
This PhD project advocates for child-aware recommender systems: systems that explicitly account for children as part of their users, recognizing their distinct needs, vulnerabilities, and rights. In pursuit of this goal, we investigate how well current recommender systems serve children, auditing algorithmic strategies from two complementary perspectives: The ‘traditional’ perspective focuses on whether recommendations align with children’s preferences. The perspective of ‘non-maleficence’ assesses suitability of content recommended, evaluating whether it respects children’s vulnerabilities to potentially harmful material. To do so, we audit current recommender systems according to both perspectives—not only in the short term, but also in the long term through simulation studies. Beyond auditing, we explore strategies and design directions for making recommender systems more responsible. Outcomes from this work should inform both academic and practitioner communities about the gaps in current systems and lay the groundwork for more equitable, safe, and meaningful recommendations for children.
From Previous Plays to Long-Term Tastes
Exploring the Long-term Reliability of Recommender Systems Simulations for Children
Simulation is widely used in recommender systems research to study algorithm behavior and its impact on users. A common strategy involves adopting a universal choice model to represent users, assuming all follow the same consumption patterns. This one-size-fits-all approach overlooks the diversity in user preferences and decision-making patterns. In this work, we scrutinize whether this universal view fails to account for unique user behavior, thus harming realism and reliability of simulation outcomes. We conduct multiple simulations with various recommendation algorithms and choice models in the movie domain, comparing outcomes to users’ organic consumption patterns. Further, we evaluate whether a holistic model that captures users’ differences in behavior would better reflect a wide user base. Our findings highlight the limitations of using a naive, universal choice model and emphasize the need for more nuanced, user-specific approaches to make contributions from simulation studies more reflective of real-world effects.