Extreme Classification (XC) aims to map a query to the most relevant documents from a very large document set. XC algorithms used in real-world applications typically learn this mapping from datasets curated from implicit feedback, such as user clicks. However, these datasets often suffer from missing labels. In this work, we observe that systematic missing labels lead to missing knowledge, which is critical for modelling relevance between queries and documents. We formally show that this absence of knowledge is hard to recover using existing methods such as propensity weighting and data imputation strategies that solely rely on the training dataset. While Large Language Models (LLMs) provide an attractive solution to augment the missing knowledge, leveraging them in applications with low latency requirements and large document sets is challenging. To mitigate missing knowledge at scale, we propose SKIM (Scalable Knowledge Infusion for Missing Labels), an algorithm that leverages a combination of Small Language Models or SLMs, e.g., Llama2-7b, and abundant unstructured meta-data to effectively address the missing label problem. We show the efficacy of our method on large-scale public datasets through a combination of unbiased evaluation strategies, such as exhaustive human annotations and simulation-based evaluation benchmarks. SKIM outperforms existing methods on Recall@100 by more than 10 absolute points. Additionally, SKIM scales to proprietary query-ad retrieval datasets containing 10 million documents, outperforming baseline methods by 12% in offline evaluations and increasing ad click-yield by 1.23% in an online A/B test conducted on Bing Search. We release the code and trained models at: github.com/bicycleman15/skim

Given an input query, a recommendation model is trained using user feedback data (e.g., click data) to output a ranked list of items. In real-world systems, besides accuracy, an important consideration for a new model is novelty of its top-k recommendations w.r.t. an existing deployed model. However, novelty of top-k items is a difficult goal to optimize a model for, since it involves a non-differentiable sorting operation on the model's predictions. Moreover, novel items, by definition, do not have any user feedback data. Given the semantic capabilities of large language models, we address these problems using a reinforcement learning (RL) formulation where large language models provide feedback for the novel items. However, given millions of candidate items, the sample complexity of a standard RL algorithm can be prohibitively high. To reduce sample complexity, we reduce the top-k list reward to a set of item-wise rewards and reformulate the state space to consist of tuples such that the action space is reduced to a binary decision; and show that this reformulation results in a significantly lower complexity when the number of items is large. We evaluate the proposed algorithm on improving novelty for a query-ad recommendation task on a large-scale search engine. Compared to supervised finetuning on recent pairs, the proposed RL-based algorithm leads to significant novelty gains with minimal loss in recall. We obtain similar results on the ORCAS query-webpage matching dataset and a product recommendation dataset based on Amazon reviews.

For many kinds of interventions, such as a new advertisement, marketing intervention, or feature recommendation, it is important to target a specific subset of people for maximizing its benefits at minimum cost or potential harm. However, a key challenge is that no data is available about the effect of such a prospective intervention since it has not been deployed yet. In this work, we propose a split-treatment analysis that ranks the individuals most likely to be positively affected by a prospective intervention using past observational data. Unlike standard causal inference methods, the split-treatment method does not need any observations of the target treatments themselves. Instead it relies on observations of a proxy treatment that is caused by the target treatment. Under reasonable assumptions, we show that the ranking of heterogeneous causal effect based on the proxy treatment is the same as the ranking based on the target treatment's effect. In the absence of any interventional data for cross-validation, Split-Treatment uses sensitivity analyses for unobserved confounding to eliminate unreliable models. We apply Split-Treatment to simulated data and a large-scale, real-world targeting task and validate our discovered rankings via a randomized experiment for the latter.

Recent years have seen a rise in social media platforms that provide peer-to-peer support to individuals suffering from mental distress. Studies on the impact of these platforms have focused on either short-term scales of single-post threads, or long-term changes over arbitrary period of time (months or years). While important, such periods of time do not necessarily follow users’ progressions through acute periods of distress. Using data from Talklife, a mental health platform, we find that user activity follows a distinct pattern of high activity periods with interleaving periods of no activity, and propose a method for identifying such bursts & breaks in activity. We then show how studying activity during bursts can provide a personalized, medium-term analysis for a key question in online mental health communities: What characteristics of user activity lead some users to find support and help, while others fall short? Using two independent outcome metrics, moments of cognitive change and self-reported changes in mood during a burst of activity, we identify two actionable features that can improve outcomes for users: persistence within bursts, and giving complex emotional support to others. Our results demonstrate the value of considering bursts as a natural unit of analysis for psychosocial change in online mental health communities.

Digital Adherence Technologies (DATs) are an increasingly popular method for verifying patient adherence to many medications. We analyze data from one city served by 99DOTS, a phone-call-based DAT deployed for Tuberculosis (TB) treatment in India where nearly 3 million people are afflicted with the disease each year. The data contains nearly 17,000 patients and 2.1M dose records. We lay the groundwork for learning from this real-world data, including a method for avoiding the effects of unobserved interventions in training data used for machine learning. We then construct a deep learning model, demonstrate its interpretability, and show how it can be adapted and trained in three different clinical scenarios to better target and improve patient care. In the real-time risk prediction setting our model could be used to proactively intervene with 21% more patients and before 76% more missed doses than current heuristic baselines. For outcome prediction, our model performs 40% better than baseline methods, allowing cities to target more resources to clinics with a heavier burden of patients at risk of failure. Finally, we present a case study demonstrating how our model can be trained in an end-to-end decision focused learning setting to achieve 15% better solution quality in an example decision problem faced by health workers.

As computing systems are more frequently and more actively intervening to improve people's work and daily lives, it is critical to correctly predict and understand the causal effects of these interventions. Conventional machine learning methods, built on pattern recognition and correlational analyses, are insufficient for causal analysis. This tutorial will introduce participants to concepts in causal inference and counterfactual reasoning, drawing from a broad literature from statistics, social sciences and machine learning. We will first motivate the use of causal inference through examples in domains such as recommender systems, social media datasets, health, education and governance. To tackle such questions, we will introduce the key ingredient that causal analysis depends on---counterfactual reasoning---and describe the two most popular frameworks based on Bayesian graphical models and potential outcomes. Based on this, we will cover a range of methods suitable for doing causal inference with large-scale online data, including randomized experiments, observational methods like matching and stratification, and natural experiment-based methods such as instrumental variables and regression discontinuity. We will also focus on best practices for evaluation and validation of causal inference techniques, drawing from our own experiences. After attending this tutorial, participants will understand the basics of causal inference, be able to appropriately apply the most common causal inference methods, and be able to recognize situations where more complex methods are required.

The first Workshop on Responsible Recommendation (FATREC) was held in conjunction with the 11th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems in August, 2017 in Como, Italy. This full-day workshop brought together researchers and practitioners to discuss several topics under the banner of social responsibility in recommender systems: fairness, accountability, transparency, privacy, and other ethical and social concerns.

Online communities provide a fertile ground for analyzing people's behavior and improving our understanding of social processes. Because both people and communities change over time, we argue that analyses of these communities that take time into account will lead to deeper and more accurate results. Using Reddit as an example, we study the evolution of users based on comment and submission data from 2007 to 2014. Even using one of the simplest temporal differences between users---yearly cohorts---we find wide differences in people's behavior, including comment activity, effort, and survival. Further, not accounting for time can lead us to misinterpret important phenomena. For instance, we observe that average comment length decreases over any fixed period of time, but comment length in each cohort of users steadily increases during the same period after an abrupt initial drop, an example of Simpson's Paradox. Dividing cohorts into sub-cohorts based on the survival time in the community provides further insights; in particular, longer-lived users start at a higher activity level and make more and shorter comments than those who leave earlier. These findings both give more insight into user evolution in Reddit in particular, and raise a number of interesting questions around studying online behavior going forward.

How predictable is success in complex social systems? In spite of a recent profusion of prediction studies that exploit online social and information network data, this question remains unanswered, in part because it has not been adequately specified. In this paper we attempt to clarify the question by presenting a simple stylized model of success that attributes prediction error to one of two generic sources: insufficiency of available data and/or models on the one hand; and inherent unpredictability of complex social systems on the other. We then use this model to motivate an illustrative empirical study of information cascade size prediction on Twitter. Despite an unprecedented volume of information about users, content, and past performance, our best performing models can explain less than half of the variance in cascade sizes. In turn, this result suggests that even with unlimited data predictive performance would be bounded well below deterministic accuracy. Finally, we explore this potential bound theoretically using simulations of a diffusion process on a random scale free network similar to Twitter. We show that although higher predictive power is possible in theory, such performance requires a homogeneous system and perfect ex-ante knowledge of it: even a small degree of uncertainty in estimating product quality or slight variation in quality across products leads to substantially more restrictive bounds on predictability. We conclude that realistic bounds on predictive accuracy are not dissimilar from those we have obtained empirically, and that such bounds for other complex social systems for which data is more difficult to obtain are likely even lower.

Recommender systems within social networks face three distinct challenges: suggesting what to consume/adopt, what to share and who to share it with. For all three cases, my and others' research work shows that people's decisions to adopt and share depend not only on their preferences for items, but also on social forces such as influence, conformity and identity management. Modeling the combined effects of people's preferences and social forces can lead to socially-aware recommender algorithms and interfaces as well more accurate models of information diffusion.

Many online systems present a list of recommendations and infer user interests implicitly from clicks or other contextual actions. For modeling user feedback in such settings, a common approach is to consider items acted upon to be relevant to the user, and irrelevant otherwise. However, clicking some but not others conveys an implicit ordering of the presented items. Pairwise learning, which leverages such implicit ordering between a pair of items, has been successful in areas such as search ranking. In this work, we study whether pairwise learning can improve community recommendation. We first present two novel pairwise models adapted from logistic regression. Both offline and online experiments in a large real-world setting show that incorporating pairwise learning improves the recommendation performance. However, the improvement is only slight. We find that users' preferences regarding the kinds of communities they like can differ greatly, which adversely affect the effectiveness of features derived from pairwise comparisons. We therefore propose a probabilistic latent semantic indexing model for pairwise learning (Pairwise PLSI), which assumes a set of users' latent preferences between pairs of items. Our experiments show favorable results for the Pairwise PLSI model and point to the potential of using pairwise learning for community recommendation.

Recommender systems associated with social networks often use social explanations (e.g. "X, Y and 2 friends like this") to support the recommendations. We present a study of the effects of these social explanations in a music recommendation context. We start with an experiment with 237 users, in which we show explanations with varying levels of social information and analyze their effect on users' decisions. We distinguish between two key decisions: the likelihood of checking out the recommended artist, and the actual rating of the artist based on listening to several songs. We find that while the explanations do have some influence on the likelihood, there is little correlation between the likelihood and actual (listening) rating for the same artist. Based on these insights, we present a generative probabilistic model that explains the interplay between explanations and background information on music preferences, and how that leads to a final likelihood rating for an artist. Acknowledging the impact of explanations, we discuss a general recommendation framework that models external informational elements in the recommendation interface, in addition to inherent preferences of users.