Understanding Accuracy-Fairness Trade-offs in Re-ranking through Elasticity in Economics
Chen Xu, Jujia Zhao, Wenjie Wang, Liang Pang, Jun Xu, Tat-Seng Chua, Maarten de Rijke
Abstract
Fairness is an increasingly important factor in re-ranking tasks. Prior work has identified a trade-off between ranking accuracy and item fairness. However, the underlying mechanisms are still not fully understood. An analogy can be drawn between re-ranking and the dynamics of economic transactions. The accuracy-fairness tradeoff parallels the coupling of the commodity tax transfer process. Fairness considerations in re-ranking, similar to a commodity tax on suppliers, ultimately translate into a cost passed on to consumers. Analogously, item-side fairness constraints result in a decline in user-side accuracy. In economics, the extent to which commodity tax on the supplier (item fairness) transfers to commodity tax on users (accuracy loss) is formalized using the notion of elasticity. The re-ranking fairness-accuracy trade-off is similarly governed by the elasticity of utility between item groups. This insight underscores the limitations of current fair re-ranking evaluations, which often rely solely on a single fairness metric, hindering comprehensive assessment of fair re-ranking algorithms.
Centered around the concept of elasticity, this work presents two significant contributions. We introduce the Elastic Fairness Curve (EF-Curve) as an evaluation framework. This framework enables a comparative analysis of algorithm performance across different elasticity levels, facilitating the selection of the most suitable approach. Furthermore, we propose ElasticRank, a fair re-ranking
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 fd5c1ba8-81ec-49ef-9a2c-4d71b6af1193Cited by top-tier papers2
- Post-hoc Provider Fairness Adaptation via Hierarchical Exposure AlignmentJingzhi Li, Zhiyong Cheng, Richang Hong, Meng WangSIGIR 2026 · 1 citation
- The Attention Market: Interpreting Online Fair Re-ranking as Manifold Optimization under Walrasian EquilibriumChen Xu, Wei Chu, Wenyu Hu, Fengran Mo et al.SIGIR 2026
Builds on13
- User-oriented Fairness in RecommendationYunqi Li, Hanxiong Chen, Zuohui Fu, Yingqiang Ge et al.WWW 2021 · 293 citations
- FairRec: Two-Sided Fairness for Personalized Recommendations in Two-Sided PlatformsGourab K. Patro, Arpita Biswas, Niloy Ganguly, Krishna P. Gummadi et al.WWW 2020 · 268 citations
- CPFair: Personalized Consumer and Producer Fairness Re-ranking for Recommender SystemsMohammadmehdi Naghiaei, Hossein A. Rahmani, Yashar DeldjooSIGIR 2022 · 117 citations
- TFROM: A Two-sided Fairness-Aware Recommendation Model for Both Customers and ProvidersYao Wu, Jian Cao, Guandong Xu, Yudong TanSIGIR 2021 · 84 citations
- Two-sided fairness in rankings via Lorenz dominanceVirginie Do, Sam Corbett-Davies, Jamal Atif, Nicolas UsunierNeurIPS 2021 · 64 citations
Related papers
- A Taxation Perspective for Fair Re-rankingChen Xu, Xiaopeng Ye, Wenjie Wang, Liang Pang et al.SIGIR 2024 · 11 citations
- LLM4Rerank: LLM-based Auto-Reranking Framework for RecommendationsJingtong Gao, Bo Chen, Xiangyu Zhao, Weiwen Liu et al.WWW 2025 · 50 citations
- Fair Ranking as Fair Division: Impact-Based Individual Fairness in RankingYuta Saito, Thorsten JoachimsKDD 2022 · 23 citations
- Unifying Diversity and Fairness in Re-ranking via Economic Growth TheoryZhaofeng Li, Chen Xu, Xinyu Lin, Wenjie Wang et al.WWW 2026
- Equity vs. Equality: Optimizing Ranking Fairness for Tailored Provider NeedsYiteng Tu, Weihang Su, Shuguang Han, Yiqun Liu et al.SIGIR 2026
