Cited by 232Recommender Systems and TechniquesEthics and Social Impacts of AIAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Degenerate Feedback Loops in Recommender Systems

Open access
Jiang, Ray, Chiappa, Silvia, Lattimore, Tor, György, András, Kohli, Pushmeet·2019·Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society

Abstract

Machine learning is used extensively in recommender systems deployed in products. The decisions made by these systems can influence user beliefs and preferences which in turn affect the feedback the learning system receives - thus creating a feedback loop. This phenomenon can give rise to the so-called "echo chambers" or "filter bubbles" that have user and societal implications. In this paper, we provide a novel theoretical analysis that examines both the role of user dynamics and the behavior of recommender systems, disentangling the echo chamber from the filter bubble effect. In addition, we offer practical solutions to slow down system degeneracy. Our study contributes toward understanding and developing solutions to commonly cited issues in the complex temporal scenario, an area that is still largely unexplored.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3306618.3314288

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 15 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. E. Pariser . 2011. The Filter Bubble: What the Internet is Hiding from You . Penguin UK. E. Pariser. 2011. The Filter Bubble: What the Internet is Hiding from You .Penguin UK.
  2. C. R. Sunstein. 2009. Republich.com 2.0 .Princeton University Press. C. R. Sunstein. 2009. Republich.com 2.0 .Princeton University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Jiang, R., Chiappa, S., Lattimore, T., György, A., & Kohli, P.
Affiliations
Google DeepMind (United Kingdom) (GB)
Venue
Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society
Publisher
ACM
Published
2019-01-27
Pages
383-390
ISSN
3065-8365 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2917760808
Cited by
232
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 8
FWCI
18.17
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Advanced Bandit Algorithms Research
Keywords
recommender systems, feedback loops, degeneracy, echo chambers, filter bubbles, user dynamics, temporal dynamics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review