Measuring Commonality in Recommendation of Cultural Content to Strengthen Cultural Citizenship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recommender systems have become the dominant means of curating cultural content, significantly influencing the nature of individual cultural experience. While the majority of academic and industrial research on recommender systems optimizes for personalized user experience, this paradigm does not capture the ways that recommender systems impact cultural experience in the aggregate, across populations of users. Although existing novelty, diversity, and fairness studies probe how recommender systems relate to the broader social role of cultural content, they do not adequately center culture as a core concept and challenge. In this work, we introduce commonality as a new measure of recommender systems that reflects the degree to which recommendations familiarize a given user population with specified categories of cultural content. Our proposed commonality metric responds to a set of arguments developed through an interdisciplinary dialogue between researchers in computer science and the social sciences and humanities. With reference to principles underpinning public service media (PSM) systems in democratic societies, we identify universality of address and content diversity in the service of strengthening cultural citizenship as particularly relevant goals for recommender systems delivering cultural content. We develop commonality as a measure of recommender system alignment with the promotion of a shared cultural experience of, and exposure to, diverse cultural content across a population of users. Moreover, we advocate for the involvement of human editors accountable to a larger value community as a fundamental part of defining categories in the service of cultural citizenship. We empirically compare the performance of recommendation algorithms using commonality with existing utility, diversity, novelty, and fairness metrics using three different domains. Our results demonstrate that commonality captures a property of system behavior complementary to existing metrics and suggests the need for alternative, non-personalized interventions in recommender systems oriented to strengthening cultural citizenship across populations of users. Moreover, commonality demonstrates both consistent results under different editorial policies and robustness to missing labels and users. Alongside existing fairness and diversity metrics, commonality contributes to a growing body of scholarship developing “public good” rationales for digital media and machine learning systems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".