Papers › Fairness in Influence Maximization through Randomization
Fairness in Influence Maximization through Randomization
Ruben Becker, Gianlorenzo D'Angelo, Sajjad Ghobadi, Hugo Gilbert
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
The influence maximization paradigm has been used by researchers in various fields in order to study how information spreads in social networks. While previously the attention was mostly on efficiency, more recently fairness issues have been taken into account in this scope. In this paper, we propose to use randomization as a mean for achieving fairness. Similar to previous works like Fish et al. (WWW '19) and Tsang et al. (IJCAI '19), we study the maximin criterion for (group) fairness. In contrast to their work however, we model the problem in such a way that, when choosing the seed sets, probabilistic strategies are possible rather than only deterministic ones. We introduce two different variants of this probabilistic problem, one that entails probabilistic strategies over nodes (node-based problem) and a second one that entails probabilistic strategies over sets of nodes (set-based problem). While the original deterministic problem involving the maximin criterion has been shown to be inapproximable, interestingly, we show that both probabilistic variants permit approximation algorithms that achieve a constant multiplicative factor of 1-1/e plus an additive arbitrarily small error that is due to the simulation of the information spread. For an experimental study, we provide implementations of multiplicative-weight routines for both problems and compare the achieved fairness values to existing methods. Maybe non-surprisingly, we show that the ex-ante values of the computed probabilistic strategies are significantly larger than the (ex-post) fairness values of previous methods. This indicates that studying fairness via randomization is a worthwhile path to follow. Interestingly and maybe more surprisingly, we observe that even the ex-post fairness values computed by our routines, dominate over the fairness achieved by previous methods on most of the instances tested.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections