Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2601.01997

Exploring Diversity, Novelty, and Popularity Bias in ChatGPT's Recommendations

Abstract

ChatGPT has emerged as a versatile tool, demonstrating capabilities across diverse domains. Given these successes, the Recommender Systems (RSs) community has begun investigating its applications within recommendation scenarios primarily focusing on accuracy. While the integration of ChatGPT into RSs has garnered significant attention, a comprehensive analysis of its performance across various dimensions remains largely unexplored. Specifically, the capabilities of providing diverse and novel recommendations or exploring potential biases such as popularity bias have not been thoroughly examined. As the use of these models continues to expand, understanding these aspects is crucial for enhancing user satisfaction and achieving long-term personalization. This study investigates the recommendations provided by ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 by assessing ChatGPT's capabilities in terms of diversity, novelty, and popularity bias. We evaluate these models on three distinct datasets and assess their performance in Top-N recommendation and cold-start scenarios. The findings reveal that ChatGPT-4 matches or surpasses traditional recommenders, demonstrating the ability to balance novelty and diversity in recommendations. Furthermore, in the cold-start scenario, ChatGPT models exhibit superior performance in both accuracy and novelty, suggesting they can be particularly beneficial for new users. This research highlights the strengths and limitations of ChatGPT's recommendations, offering new perspectives on the capacity of these models to provide recommendations beyond accuracy-focused metrics.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Dario Di Palma, Giovanni Maria Biancofiore, Vito Walter Anelli, Fedelucio Narducci, Tommaso Di Noia. 2026-01-05. Exploring Diversity, Novelty, and Popularity Bias in ChatGPT's Recommendations. https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.01997

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Do Large Language Models Favor Recent Content? A Study on Recency Bias in LLM-Based Reranking

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in information systems, including being used as second-stage rerankers in information retrieval pipelines, yet their susceptibility to recency bias has received little attention. We investigate whether LLMs implicitly favour newer documents by prepending artificial publication dates to passages in the TREC Deep Learning passage retrieval collections in 2021 (DL21) and 2022 (DL22). Across seven models, GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4o, GPT-4, LLaMA-3 8B/70B, and Qwen-2.5 7B/72B, "fresh" passages are consistently promoted, shifting the Top-10's mean publication year forward by up to 4.78 years and moving individual items by as many as 95 ranks in our listwise reranking experiments. Although larger models attenuate the effect, none eliminate it. We also observe that the preference of LLMs between two passages with an identical relevance level can be reversed by up to 25% on average after date injection in our pairwise preference experiments. These findings provide quantitative evidence of a pervasive recency bias in LLMs and highlight the importance of effective bias-mitigation strategies.

cs.IR

UniRec: Cross-stage Multi-Task Fusion with Preference Alignment for Cascaded Recommender Systems

Industrial recommender systems cascade stages with different objectives, feature spaces, and latency constraints. Optimizing pre-ranking and ranking separately induces cross-stage inconsistency: upstream models may filter out items preferred by downstream rankers, while independently tuned downstream fusion can offset upstream improvements. Most existing multi-task fusion methods target the ranking stage alone, and cross-stage methods often align with a downstream-derived score, leaving joint optimization of fusion modules across cascaded stages largely unexplored. We propose UniRec, a Unified Cross-stage Recommendation Fusion model. First, the two fusion agents partially share input embeddings in a single computation graph, allowing gradients from either stage to propagate through the shared representations. Second, a dual-axis preference alignment objective coordinates the two stages: horizontally, a compact aggregation term reorganizes dozens of pairwise objectives over heterogeneous prior signals into bidirectional preference evidence; vertically, a cross-stage consistency term transfers downstream pairwise preferences to the upstream fusion score. Third, we introduce attribute group-relative regularization, which computes relative advantages and normalizes policy updates within each attribute group, ensuring that uniformly promoting all items in a high-reward group provides no additional optimization gain. Offline experiments demonstrate UniRec consistently outperforms single-stage fusion and cross-stage coordination baselines; online A/B experiments show a 0.616% gain in app usage duration. UniRec has been fully deployed on the Kuaishou platform.

cs.IR

Scaling Articulated Rationales for MLLM-based Recommendation

We presented SARA, an industrial framework that transforms sparse articulated user rationales into scalable recommendation signals. Its data engine curates questionnaire responses into SARA-HQ, providing explicit preference supervision for aligning SARA-7B through SFT and Quality-Refining DPO. This alignment extends rationale generation from $86{,}564$ questionnaire-covered authors to the full $10$M-author space. SARA-Ranker translates the generated positive and negative rationales into features for user--author interaction modeling and negative-feedback history modeling, connecting articulated reasons to production ranking. Evaluation on unseen authors demonstrates that SARA-7B generates more specific, relevant, and grounded rationales than the evaluated general-purpose MLLMs. On top of a strong industrial ranking baseline with multimodal features, separate online A/B tests show that positive-rationale integration increases watch time by $0.99\%$, while negative-rationale integration reduces Hate feedback by $8.16\%$. Daily refresh and more than $30$ days of production deployment further demonstrate the operational feasibility of the approach. These findings establish articulated rationales as a useful complement to behavioral and content signals, and demonstrate a practical role for MLLMs in scaling sparse human explanations into preference information that improves industrial recommendation.

cs.IR