Detecting and Mitigating Bias in Algorithms Used to Disseminate Information in Social Networks
2405.12764
0
0
🎲
Abstract
Social connections are a conduit through which individuals communicate, information propagates, and diseases spread. Identifying individuals that are more likely to adopt ideas or technologies and spread them to others is essential in order to develop effective information campaigns, fight epidemics, and to maximize the reach of limited resources. Consequently a lot of work has focused on identifying sets of influencers. Here we show that seeding information using these influence maximization methods, only benefits connected and central individuals, consistently leaving the most vulnerable behind. Our results highlights troublesome outcomes of influence maximization algorithms: they do not disseminate information in an equitable manner threatening to create an increasingly unequal society. To overcome this issue we devise a simple, multi-objective algorithm, which maximises both influence and information equity. Our work demonstrates how to find fairer influencer sets, highlighting that in our search for maximizing information, we do not need to compromise on information equality.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- Identifies individuals who are more likely to adopt and spread ideas or technologies is important for effective information campaigns, fighting epidemics, and maximizing limited resources
- Existing "influence maximization" methods only benefit connected and central individuals, consistently leaving the most vulnerable behind
- This can lead to an increasingly unequal society
- Presents a multi-objective algorithm that maximizes both influence and information equity to find fairer influencer sets
Plain English Explanation
Social connections allow people to communicate, share information, and even spread diseases. Identifying individuals who are most likely to adopt and spread new ideas or technologies is crucial for things like running effective information campaigns, fighting epidemics, and making the most of limited resources.
A lot of research has focused on finding these "influencers" using influence maximization methods. However, this paper shows that these methods only benefit people who are already well-connected and central in the network. They consistently leave the most vulnerable people behind.
This can create an increasingly unequal society, where information and resources only reach certain groups. To overcome this issue, the researchers developed a new algorithm that tries to maximize both influence and information equality. This allows them to find "influencer sets" that are more fair and inclusive.
The key point is that we don't have to sacrifice information equality in our quest to maximize the spread of information. We can find ways to do both and create a more equitable society.
Technical Explanation
The paper examines the troublesome outcomes of traditional "influence maximization" algorithms, which aim to identify the most influential individuals in a social network in order to efficiently propagate information or ideas.
The researchers show that seeding information using these influence maximization methods consistently benefits only the most connected and central individuals in the network, leaving the most vulnerable behind. This threatens to create an increasingly unequal society, where information and resources are concentrated in the hands of a few.
To address this issue, the authors devise a simple, multi-objective algorithm that simultaneously maximizes both influence and information equity. This allows them to find fairer "influencer sets" that are more inclusive and better disseminate information across the entire network.
The key innovation is the addition of an equity objective, which ensures that the influence maximization process does not neglect less connected individuals. The algorithm balances the goals of reaching the largest audience possible and doing so in a way that is more equitable.
The results demonstrate that it is possible to achieve high levels of information spread without compromising on information equality. This highlights an important consideration for future work on influence maximization and the design of information dissemination systems.
Critical Analysis
The paper raises important concerns about the unintended consequences of influence maximization algorithms, which can exacerbate social inequalities by disproportionately benefiting the most connected individuals. This is a critical issue that deserves greater attention, as these algorithms are increasingly being deployed in real-world applications.
While the proposed multi-objective algorithm represents a step in the right direction, there are still some limitations and open questions. For example, the paper does not deeply explore how the algorithm's performance might vary across different types of social networks or information diffusion dynamics.
Additionally, the authors acknowledge that their approach relies on strong assumptions about the underlying network structure and information diffusion model. Relaxing these assumptions and investigating more realistic, data-driven scenarios could be an important area for future research.
It would also be valuable to further examine the potential tradeoffs between influence and equity, and explore whether there are fundamental limits to achieving both objectives simultaneously. Investigating the fairness of information dissemination in social networks over time could also yield additional insights.
Overall, this paper makes a significant contribution by highlighting a critical issue in influence maximization and proposing a novel solution. However, continued research is needed to better understand the complexities of information propagation in social media and develop more robust, equitable approaches.
Conclusion
This paper sheds light on an important problem in the field of influence maximization: the tendency of existing algorithms to disproportionately benefit the most connected and central individuals in a social network, leaving the most vulnerable behind.
By introducing a multi-objective algorithm that balances influence maximization with information equity, the researchers demonstrate that it is possible to achieve widespread information propagation without compromising on fairness and inclusivity. This represents a significant step towards developing information dissemination systems that are more equitable and beneficial to society as a whole.
The findings highlight the need to carefully consider the societal implications of technological interventions, and to strive for solutions that create a more just and balanced distribution of information and resources. As the use of influence maximization algorithms continues to grow, this work serves as an important reminder that we must prioritize both efficiency and equity in our pursuit of effective information campaigns and technological solutions.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🌐
Influence Maximization with Unknown Individual Effect on General Network
Xinyan Su, Zhiheng Zhang, Jiyan Qiu, Jun Li
0
0
The identification of a seed set to maximize information spread in a network is crucial, a concept known as Influence Maximization (IM). Elegant IM algorithms could naturally extend to cases where each node is equipped with specific weight, referred to as individual effect, to measure the node's importance. Prevailing literature has typically assumed that the individual effect remains constant during the cascade process. However, this assumption is not always feasible, as the individual effect of each node is primarily evaluated by the difference between the outputs in the activated and non-activated states, with one of these states always being unobservable after propagation. Moreover, the individual effect is sensitive to the environmental information provided by surrounding nodes. To address these challenges, we extend the consideration of IM to a broader scenario involving general networks with dynamic node individual effects, leveraging causality techniques. In our paper, we address this through the development of a Causal Influence Maximization (CauIM) algorithm. Theoretically, for CauIM, we present the generalized lower bound of influence spread and provide robustness analysis. Empirically, in synthetic and real-world experiments, we demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of CauIM, along with a novel acceleration technique.
5/2/2024
❗
Verified authors shape X/Twitter discursive communities
Stefano Guarino, Ayoub Mounim, Guido Caldarelli, Fabio Saracco
0
0
Community detection algorithms try to extract a mesoscale structure from the available network data, generally avoiding any explicit assumption regarding the quantity and quality of information conveyed by specific sets of edges. In this paper, we show that the core of ideological/discursive communities on X/Twitter can be effectively identified by uncovering the most informative interactions in an authors-audience bipartite network through a maximum-entropy null model. The analysis is performed considering three X/Twitter datasets related to the main political events of 2022 in Italy, using as benchmarks four state-of-the-art algorithms - three descriptive, one inferential -, and manually annotating nearly 300 verified users based on their political affiliation. In terms of information content, the communities obtained with the entropy-based algorithm are comparable to those obtained with some of the benchmarks. However, such a methodology on the authors-audience bipartite network: uses just a small sample of the available data to identify the central users of each community; returns a neater partition of the user set in just a few, easy to interpret, communities; clusters well-known political figures in a way that better matches the political alliances when compared with the benchmarks. Our results provide an important insight into online debates, highlighting that online interaction networks are mostly shaped by the activity of a small set of users who enjoy public visibility even outside social media.
5/9/2024
Recommendation Fairness in Social Networks Over Time
Meng Cao, Hussain Hussain, Sandipan Sikdar, Denis Helic, Markus Strohmaier, Roman Kern
0
0
In social recommender systems, it is crucial that the recommendation models provide equitable visibility for different demographic groups, such as gender or race. Most existing research has addressed this problem by only studying individual static snapshots of networks that typically change over time. To address this gap, we study the evolution of recommendation fairness over time and its relation to dynamic network properties. We examine three real-world dynamic networks by evaluating the fairness of six recommendation algorithms and analyzing the association between fairness and network properties over time. We further study how interventions on network properties influence fairness by examining counterfactual scenarios with alternative evolution outcomes and differing network properties. Our results on empirical datasets suggest that recommendation fairness improves over time, regardless of the recommendation method. We also find that two network properties, minority ratio, and homophily ratio, exhibit stable correlations with fairness over time. Our counterfactual study further suggests that an extreme homophily ratio potentially contributes to unfair recommendations even with a balanced minority ratio. Our work provides insights into the evolution of fairness within dynamic networks in social science. We believe that our findings will help system operators and policymakers to better comprehend the implications of temporal changes and interventions targeting fairness in social networks.
5/8/2024
➖
Fairness and Bias in Algorithmic Hiring: a Multidisciplinary Survey
Alessandro Fabris, Nina Baranowska, Matthew J. Dennis, David Graus, Philipp Hacker, Jorge Saldivar, Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius, Asia J. Biega
0
0
Employers are adopting algorithmic hiring technology throughout the recruitment pipeline. Algorithmic fairness is especially applicable in this domain due to its high stakes and structural inequalities. Unfortunately, most work in this space provides partial treatment, often constrained by two competing narratives, optimistically focused on replacing biased recruiter decisions or pessimistically pointing to the automation of discrimination. Whether, and more importantly what types of, algorithmic hiring can be less biased and more beneficial to society than low-tech alternatives currently remains unanswered, to the detriment of trustworthiness. This multidisciplinary survey caters to practitioners and researchers with a balanced and integrated coverage of systems, biases, measures, mitigation strategies, datasets, and legal aspects of algorithmic hiring and fairness. Our work supports a contextualized understanding and governance of this technology by highlighting current opportunities and limitations, providing recommendations for future work to ensure shared benefits for all stakeholders.
4/9/2024