Explaining Rankings with Hidden Group Bonuses
Alvin Hong Yao Yan, Suraj Shetiya, Sujoy Bhore, Priyanka Golia, Diptarka Chakraborty
Abstract
Determining a linear utility function that correlates with observed candidate rankings is a foundational problem with applications in domains such as admissions, hiring, and recommendation systems, e.g., [Storandt and Funke, AAAI'19, Zhang et al., KDD'23, Wang et al., ICDE'24 (best paper award), Chen and Wong, VLDB'24]. Traditionally, these models assume full visibility into the feature sets used to determine the utility score. However, real-world scenarios often involve sensitive attributes that are hidden or partially observed, yet may influence outcomes through additive bonuses designed to promote fairness, as in [Gale and Marian, ICDE'24]. Motivated by such practical concerns, we study a variant of the ranking explanation problem where sensitive features are unobserved but may influence candidate rankings through group-specific linear boosts.
We present a formal framework for modeling this problem and develop an algorithmic solution that leverages constraint satisfaction and automated reasoning techniques to jointly infer the linear scoring parameters and latent group bonuses consistent with the observed rankings. We further show that determining a satisfying linear function with group-specific bonuses is NP-hard in general, but when the feature dimension and the number of groups are constant, the problem admits a polynomial-time solution. Our approach is the first to address this nuanced variant, which captures key real-world challenges in fair ranking and admission systems. We perform extensive experiments on both real-world and synthetic datasets, demonstrating that our method effectively recovers hidden bonus structures and provides faithful explanations of observed ranking outcomes.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext b9b2c81a-bed3-4c2b-878a-b6ff24e62db4Builds on18
- Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-RankMarco Morik, Ashudeep Singh, Jessica Hong, Thorsten JoachimsSIGIR 2020 · 205 citations
- RankDNN: Learning to Rank for Few-Shot LearningQianyu Guo, Haotong Gong, Xujun Wei, Yanwei Fu et al.AAAI 2023 · 27 citations
- Interactive Search for One of the Top-kWeicheng Wang, Raymond Chi-Wing Wong, Min XieSIGMOD 2021 · 24 citations
- Fairness-Aware Range Queries for Selecting Unbiased DataSuraj Shetiya, Ian P. Swift, Abolfazl Asudeh, Gautam DasICDE 2022 · 19 citations
- Explaining Ranking FunctionsAbraham Gale, Amélie MarianVLDB 2021 · 14 citations
Related papers
- Explainable Disparity Compensation for Efficient Fair RankingAbraham Gale, Amélie MarianICDE 2024 · 1 citation
- Group Meritocratic Fairness in Linear Contextual BanditsRiccardo Grazzi, Arya Akhavan, John Isak Texas Falk, Leonardo Cella et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 12 citations
- ShaRP: Explaining Rankings and Preferences with Shapley ValuesVenetia Pliatsika, João Fonseca, Kateryna Akhynko, Ivan Shevchenko et al.VLDB 2025 · 7 citations
- Detection of Groups with Biased Representation in RankingJinyang Li, Yuval Moskovitch, H. V. JagadishICDE 2023 · 10 citations
- Synthesizing Scoring Functions for Rankings Using Symbolic Gradient DescentZixuan Chen, Panagiotis Manolios, Mirek RiedewaldICDE 2025 · 2 citations
