Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2606.21911

The Pitfall of Scaling Up: Uncovering and Mitigating Popularity Bias Amplification in Scaling Transformer-based Recommenders

Abstract

We identify a critical pitfall in scaling transformer-based sequential recommenders: while increasing model size improves recommendation accuracy, it simultaneously amplifies popularity bias. This bias drives systems to over-recommend popular items at the expense of niche ones, which not only undermines fairness but also degrades the broader ecosystem by reinforcing the Matthew effect and filter bubbles. Consequently, this bias amplification emerges as a fundamental obstacle to sustainable model scaling. Through comprehensive theoretical and empirical analyses, we uncover the root cause of this amplification. Our findings reveal that as model depth increases, the two core components of the transformer architecture, i.e., attention aggregation and feed-forward projections, synergistically induce severe spectral collapse in model predictions, which directly translates to the amplification of popularity bias. To address this challenge, we propose SPRINT (Scalable Popularity Regularization IN Transformers), which mitigates spectral collapse during scaling by constraining (i) the maximum column-sums of the attention score matrices and (ii) the spectral norms of the feed-forward parameters. Extensive experiments demonstrate that SPRINT significantly improves both accuracy and long-tail fairness. Crucially, it yields more favorable scaling behaviors when expanding model sizes from 0.05M to 0.34B parameters. The code is available at https://github.com/Tiny-Snow/GenRec.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Weiqin Yang, Yue Pan, Chongming Gao, Sheng Zhou, Xiang Wang, Can Wang, Jiawei Chen. 2026-06-20. The Pitfall of Scaling Up: Uncovering and Mitigating Popularity Bias Amplification in Scaling Transformer-based Recommenders. https://doi.org/10.1145/3770855.3818185

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

WebArxiv: A Reproducible Benchmark for Evaluating Multimodal Web Agents on arXiv Tasks

Foundation models now enable autonomous agents to interact with real-world websites, but existing benchmarks emphasize general-purpose browsing, underrepresent research-oriented environments and scholarly discovery workflows, and often depend on live sites whose changing content and structure undermine reproducibility. arXiv provides a realistic, reproducible, hierarchically structured, information-centric testbed without privacy-sensitive interactions. We introduce WebArxiv, a static-snapshot benchmark comprising 510 time-invariant tasks, each with a unique deterministic ground truth. Its diverse, realistic scholarly tasks go beyond simple information lookup and rule following to emphasize multi-constraint paper retrieval, fine-grained content extraction, and cross-paper comparison. Evaluations of a range of foundation-model-based web agents show that WebArxiv remains challenging. Behavioral analysis reveals that agents over-rely on fixed interaction histories, causing incomplete or repetitive reasoning. We therefore equip agents with a lightweight dynamic-memory mechanism for adaptive retrieval and reasoning over relevant context. The benchmark and code are available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/74E4423BVNW/README.md.

cs.IR

GreekBarRetrieval: A Benchmark for Greek Statutory Retrieval

Statutory retrieval is necessary for citation-grounded legal question answering, but remains underexplored for Greek. We introduce GreekBarRetrieval, a public retrieval benchmark derived from, and complementing GreekBarBench, which did not include retrieval. The new benchmark comprises 283 bar-exam questions, each accompanied by the facts of the case it refers to, and 6,308 candidate statutory articles to retrieve from. Questions and facts are stated in everyday language, but need to be mapped to the formal terminology of statutes and their abstract legal concepts. A further complication is that not all of the case facts are relevant to each question of a case. Experimenting with three BM25 variants and nine dense retrievers, we find that vanilla dense retrieval far outperforms vanilla sparse retrieval in Recall@100. However, LLM-based query reformulation helps BM25 close that gap, while also improving dense retrieval. With a ten-round ReAct-like LLM reformulation loop that we introduce, BM25 improves further in Recall@100 and obtains the best nDCG and MAP scores of all tested retrievers. Query reformulation also outperforms pseudo-relevance feedback, sparse-dense fusion, and English translation.

cs.IR

Parameterized Dense-Sparse Fusion for Hybrid Retrieval: Tuning a Rank-Score Mix on BEIR SciFact with Qdrant

We study a parameterized hybrid ranker that fuses a dense embedding list and a sparse lexical list. The method has a small, explicit parameter vector: a dense prior $α\in [0,1]$, a score-versus-rank mix $λ\in [0,1]$, an RRF smoothing parameter $κ> 0$, optional list-geometry coefficients that move $α$ per query, and a router margin $τ$ that can turn sparse search off. We grid-search those ranges on SciFact train (809 queries) and freeze the chosen values on SciFact test (300). The tuned rank-score mix ($α= 0.8$, $λ= 0.75$, $κ= 20$) reaches 0.753 nDCG@10 and 0.889 recall@10, outperforming dense BGE (0.742 / 0.871) and equal-weight RRF (0.707 nDCG@10) on that test split. A list-conditioned $α$ adds +0.0006 nDCG; a sparse-off router is rejected by the same train split (any $τ$ that skipped approximately 50% of queries lost nDCG). These coefficients are dataset-specific. Equal RRF with the same models does not beat dense on a nine-zip BEIR macro-average (0.479 vs. 0.519 nDCG@10). Repeating the same train-then-freeze sweep independently on all 20 indexed units beats equal RRF on 20/20 and dense on 16/20 (unit-mean nDCG@10 0.467 vs. 0.462 dense vs. 0.420 RRF). Other corpora should reuse the ranges, not a copy of the SciFact point.

cs.IR