Counterfactual explanations (CEs) provide an intuitive way to understand recommender systems by identifying minimal modifications to user-item interactions that alter recommendation outcomes. Existing CE methods for recommender systems, however, have been evaluated under heterogeneous protocols, using different datasets, recommenders, metrics, and even explanation formats, which hampers reproducibility and fair comparison. Our paper systematically reproduces, re-implement, and re-evaluate eleven state-of-the-art CE methods for recommender systems, covering both native explainers (e.g., LIME-RS, SHAP, PRINCE, ACCENT, LXR, GREASE) and specific graph-based explainers originally proposed for GNNs. Here, a unified benchmarking framework is proposed to assess explainers along three dimensions: explanation format (implicit vs. explicit), evaluation level (item-level vs. list-level), and perturbation scope (user interaction vectors vs. user-item interaction graphs). Our evaluation protocol includes effectiveness, sparsity, and computational complexity metrics, and extends existing item-level assessments to top-K list-level explanations. Through extensive experiments on three real-world datasets and six representative recommender models, we analyze how well previously reported strengths of CE methods generalize across diverse setups. We observe that the trade-off between effectiveness and sparsity depends strongly on the specific method and evaluation setting, particularly under the explicit format; in addition, explainer performance remains largely consistent across item level and list level evaluations, and several graph-based explainers exhibit notable scalability limitations on large recommender graphs. Our results refine and challenge earlier conclusions about the robustness and practicality of CE generation methods in recommender systems: https://github.com/L2R-UET/CFExpRec.

Recommendation systems have faced significant challenges in cold-start scenarios, where new items with a limited history of interaction need to be effectively recommended to users. Though multimodal data (e.g., images, text, audio, etc.) offer rich information to address this issue, existing approaches often employ simplistic integration methods such as concatenation, average pooling, or fixed weighting schemes, which fail to capture the complex relationships between modalities. Our study proposes a novel Mixture of Experts framework for multimodal cold-start recommendation (MAMEX), which dynamically leverages latent representation from different modalities. MAMEX utilizes modality-specific expert networks and introduces a learnable gating mechanism that adaptively weights the contribution of each modality based on its content characteristics. This approach enables MAMEX to emphasize the most informative modalities for each item while maintaining robustness when certain modalities are less relevant or missing. Extensive experiments on benchmark datasets show that MAMEX outperforms state-of-the-art models with superior accuracy and adaptability.

Bundle recommendation aims to suggest a set of interconnected items to users. However, diverse interaction types and sparse interaction matrices often pose challenges for previous approaches in accurately predicting user-bundle adoptions. Inspired by the distant supervision strategy and generative paradigm, we propose BRIDGE, a novel framework for bundle recommendation. It consists of two main components, namely the item-sensitive instruction generation and the pseudo bundle generation modules. Inspired by the distant supervision approach, the former is to generate more auxiliary information, e.g., sampled item-sensitive instruction, for training without using external data. This information is subsequently aggregated with collaborative signals from user historical interactions to create pseudo ‘ideal’ bundles. This capability allows BRIDGE to explore all aspects of bundles, rather than being limited to existing real-world bundles. It effectively bridging the gap between user imagination and predefined bundles, hence improving the bundle recommendation performance. Experimental results and analyses validate the superiority of BRIDGE over state-of-the-art methods across four benchmark datasets. Our implementation is available at https://github.com/Rec4Fun/BRIDGE.

Existing studies on bundle construction have relied merely on user feedback via bipartite graphs or enhanced item representations using semantic information. These approaches fail to capture elaborate relations hidden in real-world bundle structures, resulting in suboptimal bundle representations. To overcome this limitation, we propose RaMen, a novel method that provides a holistic multi-strategy approach for bundle construction. RaMen utilizes both intrinsic (characteristics) and extrinsic (collaborative signals) information to model bundle structures through Explicit Strategy-aware Learning (ESL) and Implicit Strategy-aware Learning (ISL). ESL employs task-specific attention mechanisms to encode multi-modal data and direct collaborative relations between items, thereby explicitly capturing essential bundle features. Moreover, ISL computes hyperedge dependencies and hypergraph message passing to uncover shared latent intents among groups of items. Integrating diverse strategies enables RaMen to learn more comprehensive and robust bundle representations. Meanwhile, Multi-strategy Alignment & Discrimination module is employed to facilitate knowledge transfer between learning strategies and ensure discrimination between items/bundles. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of RaMen over state-of-the-art models on various domains, justifying valuable insights into complex item set problems.

Recommender systems are known to exhibit fairness issues, particularly on the product side, where products and their associated suppliers receive unequal exposure in recommended results. While this problem has been widely studied in traditional recommendation settings, its implications for bundle recommendation (BR) remain largely unexplored. This emerging task introduces additional complexity: recommendations are generated at the bundle level, yet user satisfaction and product (or supplier) exposure depend on both the bundle and the individual items it contains. Existing fairness frameworks and metrics designed for traditional recommender systems may not directly translate to this multi-layered setting. In this paper, we conduct a comprehensive reproducibility study of product-side fairness in BR across three real-world datasets using four state-of-the-art BR methods. We analyze exposure disparities at both the bundle and item levels using multiple fairness metrics, uncovering important patterns. Our results show that exposure patterns differ notably between bundles and items, revealing the need for fairness interventions that go beyond bundle-level assumptions. We also find that fairness assessments vary considerably depending on the metric used, reinforcing the need for multi-faceted evaluation. Furthermore, user behavior plays a critical role: when users interact more frequently with bundles than with individual items, BR systems tend to yield fairer exposure distributions across both levels. Overall, our findings offer actionable insights for building fairer bundle recommender systems and establish a vital foundation for future research in this emerging domain.