News recommendation algorithms influence far more than what stories we click—they can shape our understanding of the world. In this episode, Kyle Polich speaks with Andreea Iana about responsible AI, filter bubbles, multilingual news recommendation, and her open-source NewsRecLib framework for evaluating recommender systems. They explore why bigger models aren't always better and how future recommendation systems can balance personalization with diversity and societal impact.

What if you could simply tell a recommendation system what you want instead of relying on likes, dislikes, and watch history? Kyle Polich talks with Fuyuan Lyu about the DPR framework, which combines large language models and traditional recommender systems to give users direct control over recommendations through natural language. Together they explore how conversational interfaces could transform platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and news feeds while preserving the strengths of modern recommendation algorithms.

How can researchers audit recommendation systems when the algorithms are hidden from view? Hieu Le joins Kyle Polich to discuss Auto-Like, a reinforcement learning framework that systematically explores how platforms like TikTok personalize content feeds. The conversation covers recommendation transparency, black-box auditing, and the future of platform accountability.

Aaron Payne, an MBA student at Georgia Tech studying business analytics and a Senior Insights Analyst at Chick-fil-A, joins Kyle Polich to talk about turning analytics into decisions that matter. They unpack a real-world forecasting project with Comfama in Colombia, including messy data realities, interpretability tradeoffs, and why "data science for good" starts with the people impacted.

Kyle Polich sits down with Yashar Deldjoo, research scientist and Associate Professor at the Polytechnic University of Bari, to explore how recommender systems have evolved and why trustworthiness matters. They unpack key dimensions of responsible AI, including robustness to adversarial attacks, privacy, explainability, and fairness, and discuss how LLMs introduce new risks like hallucinations. The episode closes with a look at "agentic" recommender systems, where tools and memory shift recommendations from ranked lists to end-to-end task completion.

Goodreads star ratings can be misleading as measures of "book quality," and research from Hannes Rosenbusch suggests that for many professionally published books, differences between readers often matter more than differences between books. The episode also explores how to model reader preferences, why reviews often reveal more about the reviewer than the text, and how LLMs can aid computational literary research while still falling short of human editors in creative writing.

Ervin Dervishaj, a PhD student at the University of Copenhagen, discusses his research on disentangled representation learning in recommender systems, finding that while disentanglement strongly correlates with interpretability, it doesn't consistently improve recommendation performance. The conversation explores how disentanglement acts as a regularizer that can enhance user trust and interpretability at the potential cost of some accuracy, and touches on the future of large language models in denoising user interaction data.

Ekaterina (Kat) Fedorova from MIT EECS joins us to discuss strategic learning in recommender systems—what happens when users collectively coordinate to game recommendation algorithms. Kat's research reveals surprising findings: algorithmic "protest movements" can paradoxically help platforms by providing clearer preference signals, and the challenge of distinguishing coordinated behavior from bot activity is more complex than it appears. This episode explores the intersection of machine learning and game theory, examining what happens when your training data actively responds to your algorithm.

Anas Buhayh discusses multi-stakeholder fairness in recommender systems and the S'mores framework—a simulation allowing users to choose between mainstream and niche algorithms. His research shows specialized recommenders improve utility for niche users while raising questions about filter bubbles and data privacy.

In this episode, host Kyle Polich speaks with Roan Schellingerhout, a fourth-year PhD student at Maastricht University, about explainable multi-stakeholder recommender systems for job recruitment. Roan discusses his research on creating AI-powered job matching systems that balance the needs of multiple stakeholders—job seekers, recruiters, HR professionals, and companies. The conversation explores different types of explanations for job recommendations, including textual, bar chart, and graph-based formats, with findings showing that lay users strongly prefer simple textual explanations over more technical visualizations. Roan shares insights from his "healthy friction" study, which tested whether users could distinguish between real AI-generated explanations and randomly generated ones, revealing that participants often used explanations as information sources rather than decision-making tools. The discussion delves into the technical architecture behind these systems, including the use of knowledge graphs built from tabular data, inference rules, and large language models to generate human-friendly explanations. Roan explains how his research aims to open the black box of recommender systems, making them more transparent and trustworthy for non-technical users. Looking forward, he discusses ongoing work on automated knowledge graph construction from resumes and job listings, research into fairness considerations around gender and location, and plans for real-world testing with actual job seekers. The episode concludes with Roan's vision for the future: AI systems that support rather than replace human recruiters, making the job search process less grueling while maintaining the essential human judgment that recruitment requires.